Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems
Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), i...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Angerer, Verena [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2021transfer abstract |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality - Ren, Chunhui ELSEVIER, 2022, Amsterdam [u.a.] |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:289 ; year:2021 ; day:1 ; month:07 ; pages:0 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV053823427 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV053823427 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230626035359.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 210910s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001950.pica |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV053823427 | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0301-4797(21)00585-5 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 300 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 70.00 |2 bkl | ||
| 084 | |a 71.00 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Angerer, Verena |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021transfer abstract | |
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. | ||
| 520 | |a Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. | ||
| 650 | 7 | |a Biodiversity damage potential |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Potentially disappeared fraction |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Alpine pasture |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Organic beef production |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Small-scale farms |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Carbon footprint |2 Elsevier | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Sabia, Emilio |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a König von Borstel, Uta |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gauly, Matthias |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |n Elsevier |a Ren, Chunhui ELSEVIER |t Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality |d 2022 |g Amsterdam [u.a.] |w (DE-627)ELV008002754 |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:289 |g year:2021 |g day:1 |g month:07 |g pages:0 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 70.00 |j Sozialwissenschaften allgemein: Allgemeines |q VZ |
| 936 | b | k | |a 71.00 |j Soziologie: Allgemeines |q VZ |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 289 |j 2021 |b 1 |c 0701 |h 0 | ||
| author_variant |
v a va |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
angererverenasabiaemilioknigvonborstelut:2021----:niomnaadidvriyfetodfeete |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2021transfer abstract |
| bklnumber |
70.00 71.00 |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001950.pica (DE-627)ELV053823427 (ELSEVIER)S0301-4797(21)00585-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 300 VZ 70.00 bkl 71.00 bkl Angerer, Verena verfasserin aut Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems 2021transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. Biodiversity damage potential Elsevier Potentially disappeared fraction Elsevier Alpine pasture Elsevier Organic beef production Elsevier Small-scale farms Elsevier Carbon footprint Elsevier Sabia, Emilio oth König von Borstel, Uta oth Gauly, Matthias oth Enthalten in Elsevier Ren, Chunhui ELSEVIER Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality 2022 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV008002754 volume:289 year:2021 day:1 month:07 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U 70.00 Sozialwissenschaften allgemein: Allgemeines VZ 71.00 Soziologie: Allgemeines VZ AR 289 2021 1 0701 0 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001950.pica (DE-627)ELV053823427 (ELSEVIER)S0301-4797(21)00585-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 300 VZ 70.00 bkl 71.00 bkl Angerer, Verena verfasserin aut Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems 2021transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. Biodiversity damage potential Elsevier Potentially disappeared fraction Elsevier Alpine pasture Elsevier Organic beef production Elsevier Small-scale farms Elsevier Carbon footprint Elsevier Sabia, Emilio oth König von Borstel, Uta oth Gauly, Matthias oth Enthalten in Elsevier Ren, Chunhui ELSEVIER Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality 2022 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV008002754 volume:289 year:2021 day:1 month:07 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U 70.00 Sozialwissenschaften allgemein: Allgemeines VZ 71.00 Soziologie: Allgemeines VZ AR 289 2021 1 0701 0 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001950.pica (DE-627)ELV053823427 (ELSEVIER)S0301-4797(21)00585-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 300 VZ 70.00 bkl 71.00 bkl Angerer, Verena verfasserin aut Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems 2021transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. Biodiversity damage potential Elsevier Potentially disappeared fraction Elsevier Alpine pasture Elsevier Organic beef production Elsevier Small-scale farms Elsevier Carbon footprint Elsevier Sabia, Emilio oth König von Borstel, Uta oth Gauly, Matthias oth Enthalten in Elsevier Ren, Chunhui ELSEVIER Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality 2022 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV008002754 volume:289 year:2021 day:1 month:07 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U 70.00 Sozialwissenschaften allgemein: Allgemeines VZ 71.00 Soziologie: Allgemeines VZ AR 289 2021 1 0701 0 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001950.pica (DE-627)ELV053823427 (ELSEVIER)S0301-4797(21)00585-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 300 VZ 70.00 bkl 71.00 bkl Angerer, Verena verfasserin aut Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems 2021transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. Biodiversity damage potential Elsevier Potentially disappeared fraction Elsevier Alpine pasture Elsevier Organic beef production Elsevier Small-scale farms Elsevier Carbon footprint Elsevier Sabia, Emilio oth König von Borstel, Uta oth Gauly, Matthias oth Enthalten in Elsevier Ren, Chunhui ELSEVIER Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality 2022 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV008002754 volume:289 year:2021 day:1 month:07 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U 70.00 Sozialwissenschaften allgemein: Allgemeines VZ 71.00 Soziologie: Allgemeines VZ AR 289 2021 1 0701 0 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001950.pica (DE-627)ELV053823427 (ELSEVIER)S0301-4797(21)00585-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 300 VZ 70.00 bkl 71.00 bkl Angerer, Verena verfasserin aut Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems 2021transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. Biodiversity damage potential Elsevier Potentially disappeared fraction Elsevier Alpine pasture Elsevier Organic beef production Elsevier Small-scale farms Elsevier Carbon footprint Elsevier Sabia, Emilio oth König von Borstel, Uta oth Gauly, Matthias oth Enthalten in Elsevier Ren, Chunhui ELSEVIER Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality 2022 Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV008002754 volume:289 year:2021 day:1 month:07 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U 70.00 Sozialwissenschaften allgemein: Allgemeines VZ 71.00 Soziologie: Allgemeines VZ AR 289 2021 1 0701 0 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:289 year:2021 day:1 month:07 pages:0 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:289 year:2021 day:1 month:07 pages:0 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Sozialwissenschaften allgemein: Allgemeines Soziologie: Allgemeines |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Biodiversity damage potential Potentially disappeared fraction Alpine pasture Organic beef production Small-scale farms Carbon footprint |
| dewey-raw |
300 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Angerer, Verena @@aut@@ Sabia, Emilio @@oth@@ König von Borstel, Uta @@oth@@ Gauly, Matthias @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2021-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
ELV008002754 |
| dewey-sort |
3300 |
| id |
ELV053823427 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV053823427</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230626035359.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">210910s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">/cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001950.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV053823427</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0301-4797(21)00585-5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">300</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">70.00</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">71.00</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Angerer, Verena</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Biodiversity damage potential</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Potentially disappeared fraction</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Alpine pasture</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Organic beef production</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Small-scale farms</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Carbon footprint</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sabia, Emilio</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">König von Borstel, Uta</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gauly, Matthias</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier</subfield><subfield code="a">Ren, Chunhui ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality</subfield><subfield code="d">2022</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV008002754</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:289</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">day:1</subfield><subfield code="g">month:07</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">70.00</subfield><subfield code="j">Sozialwissenschaften allgemein: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">71.00</subfield><subfield code="j">Soziologie: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">289</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="b">1</subfield><subfield code="c">0701</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Angerer, Verena |
| spellingShingle |
Angerer, Verena ddc 300 bkl 70.00 bkl 71.00 Elsevier Biodiversity damage potential Elsevier Potentially disappeared fraction Elsevier Alpine pasture Elsevier Organic beef production Elsevier Small-scale farms Elsevier Carbon footprint Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems |
| authorStr |
Angerer, Verena |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)ELV008002754 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
300 - Social sciences |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
300 VZ 70.00 bkl 71.00 bkl Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems Biodiversity damage potential Elsevier Potentially disappeared fraction Elsevier Alpine pasture Elsevier Organic beef production Elsevier Small-scale farms Elsevier Carbon footprint Elsevier |
| topic |
ddc 300 bkl 70.00 bkl 71.00 Elsevier Biodiversity damage potential Elsevier Potentially disappeared fraction Elsevier Alpine pasture Elsevier Organic beef production Elsevier Small-scale farms Elsevier Carbon footprint |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 300 bkl 70.00 bkl 71.00 Elsevier Biodiversity damage potential Elsevier Potentially disappeared fraction Elsevier Alpine pasture Elsevier Organic beef production Elsevier Small-scale farms Elsevier Carbon footprint |
| topic_browse |
ddc 300 bkl 70.00 bkl 71.00 Elsevier Biodiversity damage potential Elsevier Potentially disappeared fraction Elsevier Alpine pasture Elsevier Organic beef production Elsevier Small-scale farms Elsevier Carbon footprint |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
e s es v b u k vbu vbuk m g mg |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
ELV008002754 |
| dewey-tens |
300 - Social sciences, sociology & anthropology |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)ELV008002754 |
| title |
Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV053823427 (ELSEVIER)S0301-4797(21)00585-5 |
| title_full |
Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems |
| author_sort |
Angerer, Verena |
| journal |
Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality |
| journalStr |
Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
300 - Social sciences |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2021 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
0 |
| author_browse |
Angerer, Verena |
| container_volume |
289 |
| class |
300 VZ 70.00 bkl 71.00 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Angerer, Verena |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 |
| dewey-full |
300 |
| title_sort |
environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems |
| title_auth |
Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems |
| abstract |
Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. |
| abstractGer |
Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U |
| title_short |
Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Sabia, Emilio König von Borstel, Uta Gauly, Matthias |
| author2Str |
Sabia, Emilio König von Borstel, Uta Gauly, Matthias |
| ppnlink |
ELV008002754 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T20:01:22.543Z |
| _version_ |
1803861185048608768 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV053823427</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230626035359.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">210910s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">/cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001950.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV053823427</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0301-4797(21)00585-5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">300</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">70.00</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">71.00</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Angerer, Verena</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Environmental and biodiversity effects of different beef production systems</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Agricultural livestock production ranks among the most environmental impactful industry sectors at the global level, and within the livestock sector, beef production accounts for a large proportion of environmental damage. Beef production in Alpine mountain regions, such as in South Tyrol (Italy), is a small, but increasing agricultural sector. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the environmental impact of different organic and conventional beef production systems in South Tyrol and to compare their environmental impact and effect on biodiversity under Alpine production conditions. Live cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used and 1 kg of live weight (LW) was chosen as functional unit (FU). Global warming potential (GWP, kg CO2-eq), acidification potential (AP, g SO2-eq), eutrophication potential (EP, g PO4-eq), non-renewable energy use (NRE, MJ-eq), land occupation (LO, m2 organic land/year) and biodiversity damage potential (BDP) expressed in potential disappeared fraction (PDF) were investigated. The study involved 18 beef cattle farms in the South Tyrolean region: Conventional calf-fattening farms (CCF = 6), organic suckler cow farms (SCF = 6), and conventional heifer/ox fattening farms (HOF = 6). The CCF system showed a higher environmental impact compared to SCF and HOF systems for all impact categories (P 0.05) were found for most of the considered impact categories (means ± SEM per FU): GWP: 19.8 vs 17.1 ± 4.2 kg CO2-eq, AP: 11.4 vs 9.3 ± 4.7 g SO2-eq, EP: 4.1 vs 2.8 ± 1.2, NRE: 21.9 vs 13.8 ± 7 MJ-eq, SCF and HOF respectively. Only for LO (70.8 vs 44.1 ± 17.7 m2 organic/y, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) and the effect on BDP (−1.93 vs −0.85 ± 0.35, PDF, P < 0.01, SCF and HOF respectively) differences between organic and conventional production methods could be revealed. The study showed that beef cattle husbandry in the Alpine area has a satisfactory environmental performance. In particular, the systems studied showed a positive impact in terms of biodiversity.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Biodiversity damage potential</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Potentially disappeared fraction</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Alpine pasture</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Organic beef production</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Small-scale farms</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Carbon footprint</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sabia, Emilio</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">König von Borstel, Uta</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gauly, Matthias</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier</subfield><subfield code="a">Ren, Chunhui ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Cohort, signaling, and early-career dynamics: The hidden significance of class in black-white earnings inequality</subfield><subfield code="d">2022</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV008002754</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:289</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">day:1</subfield><subfield code="g">month:07</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112523</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">70.00</subfield><subfield code="j">Sozialwissenschaften allgemein: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">71.00</subfield><subfield code="j">Soziologie: Allgemeines</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">289</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="b">1</subfield><subfield code="c">0701</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.3999014 |