LCA Food 2012 in Saint Malo, France! - Manifestations et colloques ...

PLENARY SESSION 3: METHODS FOR BIODIVERSITY AND SOIL QUALITY 8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Plenary session 3: Methods for Biodiversity and Soil Quality
338
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
Produce beef or biodiversity? The trade-offs between intensive and
extensive beef fattening
Thomas Nemecek*, Frank Hayer, Martina Alig, Philippe Jeanneret, Gérard Gaillard
Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART, CH-8046 Zürich, Switzerland,
Corresponding author. E-mail: thomas.nemecek@art.admin.ch
ABSTRACT
According to the concept of multi-functionality, agriculture has to fulfil several functions. In addition to the production of food, feed,
fibre and fuels, it aims at maintaining a high level of biodiversity, maintaining agricultural production in marginal areas, and ensuring
living for a rural population. The productive function requires highly productive systems, whereas to increase biodiversity, extensive
management is needed. This trade-off between high productivity and high biodiversity potential is highlighted in this paper, using a
case study with different beef production systems in Switzerland.
The SALCA-biodiversity method (Jeanneret et al., 2008) is used to assess potential impacts of agricultural management on the overall
species diversity. The method uses 11 indicator organisms groups to describe the potential impacts on biodiversity. Three different
beef production systems were evaluated using model farms: an integrated beef fattening (IBF), an integrated suckler cow system
(ISC), and an organic suckler cow system (OSC), all located in the lowlands. First an inventory of all used agricultural areas (for
feedstuff production, grazing, rearing animals, etc.) was established. Then, an inventory of all management activities influencing
biodiversity was established and the potential impacts on the indicator organism groups were assessed. The average biodiversity
scores were calculated as area and time weighted averages of all used agricultural areas. Within a given crop the differences were
relatively small, whereas the differences due to different management intensities of grassland were very large. The final result is thus
determined by the composition of the feed ration, the yields of the different feed raw materials, which determine the area required for
their production, and the management intensity and type of use (grazing, cutting) for grassland.
The integrated beef fattening system uses two to three times less area to produce 1 kg of beef compared to the suckler cow systems.
This is due to the fact that the suckler cow has to be fully allocated to the beef production, whereas in an intensive beef fattening
system, the calf can be considered as a by-product of dairy production and the mother cow is allocated mainly to the milk. Furthermore,
the suckler cow systems use partly extensively managed grassland with lower yields. The OSC needs slightly more area to
produce the same amount of beef than ISC, due to lower yields of organic crops and grasslands.
The overall species diversity was estimated to be lowest for the IBF and higher for the suckler cow systems (Fig. 1). This difference
is explained by the fact that overall species diversity is generally higher in grassland than in crops. In particular less intensively and
extensively managed grassland had higher scores for overall species diversity. Due to the ban of pesticides, the OSC had a slightly
higher biodiversity score than ISC.
Now we have to consider that the areas used are very different: the integrated beef system uses less area; this leaves area for other
uses. If we assume that the excess area is used for ecological compensation areas, the integrated system would have the highest overall
biodiversity score. If however, the excess area is managed in the same way as the rest of the system, the extensive systems would
have the highest scores, but the overall production would not be the same.
Two scenarios have been calculated to estimate the theoretical potentials for biodiversity and productivity of beef fattening: one
scenario assesses the maximal biodiversity potentials, which could be achieved by extensive management (Fig. 1). The difference to
the studied systems is considerable. This shows that the current beef production systems have a high potential for development both
in terms of higher productivity or higher biodiversity. These two goals are in conflict. Research is needed to develop beef fattening
systems which better reconcile a good productivity with a high level of biodiversity (the green arrow “sustainable development”).
Acknowledgement
These research results were developed by ART with the support of COOP Switzerland.
Reference
Jeanneret, P., Baumgartner, D.U., Knuchel, R.F. & Gaillard, G., 2008. A new LCIA method for assessing impacts of agricultural
activities on biodiversity (SALCA-Biodiversity). In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on LCA in the Agri-Food
Sector – Towards a sustainable management of the Food chain, Nemecek, T. & Gaillard, G. (eds.). November 12–14, 2008, Zurich.
Agroscope ART, 34-39.