Search

Increasing food demands are causing rapid transitions in farming systems, often involving intensified land and resource use. While transitioning has benefits regarding poverty alleviation and food outputs, it also causes environmental and social issues over time. This study aims to understand the transitions in farming systems in a region in Telangana, from 1997 to 2015, and their effect on livestock rearing and smallholder livelihoods. We also examine the impact of the transitions on lower caste groups and women in particular. We collected data using a combination of methods, i.e., a household survey, focus group discussions, and secondary data sources, to build a comprehensive picture of the transitions in the region. We found that subsistence mixed farming systems transitioned to market-orientated specialized systems over a short time span. As the transition process gained momentum, households either intensified their production or got marginalized. Technological interventions, development programs with integrated approaches, and market demand for certain agricultural produce triggered increased regional production but also led to the scarcity of water, land, and labor. The transitions marginalized some of the households, changed the role of livestock in farming, and have been inclusive of both lower caste groups and women in terms of increased ownership of large ruminants and access to technologies. However, for women specifically, further increase in workload in the context of farming is also found.

A circular, bio-based economy could provide the pathway to a sustainable future. Here we present five ecological principles to guide biomass use towards a circular bioeconomy: safeguarding and regenerating the health of our (agro)ecosystems; avoiding non-essential products and the waste of essential ones; prioritizing biomass streams for basic human needs; utilizing and recycling by-products of (agro)ecosystems; and using renewable energy while minimizing overall energy use. Implementing these principles calls for a transformation of our current economic system, including fundamental changes to policies, technologies, organizations, social behaviour and markets. Natural biomass cycling and avoidance of biomass overharvest are the basis of a sustainable food system. This study proposes five guiding principles for biomass use based on the concepts of ecology and circularity, as well as leverage points for their implementation.

The European Union (EU) envisions a shift towards a bioeconomy to address challenges such as reducing dependence on non-renewable resources, managing natural resources sustainably and food security. As a result, biomass will become an increasingly important resource in the bioeconomy. This will require careful and sustainable management especially because biomass comes from a wide variety of economic sectors and is governed by different policies. The bioeconomy will, therefore, require coherence between many different policy domains. However, little is known how policy goals in these domains interact and how these interactions may play out in different contexts. Hence, this study aims to assess coherence between bioeconomy and agro-food policies by assessing the interactions between bioeconomy and agro-food goals (i.e. trade-offs, synergies) as well as revealing knowledge gaps. Utilising qualitative content analysis, a survey and focus groups, we find that bioeconomy policy goals and agro-food policy goals are largely considered to be consistent, when considering coherence scores only, and that synergies outweigh trade-offs, both in quantity and in strength. However, all bioeconomy policy domains show some trade-offs with agro-food policy. We furthermore find disagreement (i.e. range of scores) and uncertainty in scientific knowledge-base, particularly concerning waste and bio-based industry. Disagreement surrounds the feasibility of some policy goals, such as decoupling economic growth from the environment. We conclude that a shift towards a bioeconomy will have to acknowledge the interactions between different policy goals across the different sectors and avoid ‘silo-thinking’. This can be achieved through addressing vagueness in policies and allowing integrated policies to embrace uncertainty.

In the version of this Perspective initially published, Abigail Muscat was missing a footnote designation of corresponding author, while Imke J.M. de Boer was mistakenly identified as the corresponding author. Abigail Muscat is now shown as the sole corresponding author. The original Perspective has been corrected in the online version of the article.

Appropriating marginal land is seen as a way to overcome a wide range of land-use challenges such as food-feed-fuel competition, avoiding land abandonment, and preserving nature. As a result, there is growing interest in policy and academic communities to identify, define and measure the potential of marginal land to overcome these challenges. However, multiple definitions of marginal land exist due to the various ways of framing the problems and the solutions marginal land can address. This leads to a number of competing claims on and diverging debates about marginal land. To explore the competing claims on marginal land in these frames, we performed a framing analysis of EU policy debates about marginal land. Through this analysis, we find that different actors have conflicting ways of framing what problems marginal land can address and what courses of action to take. These frames do not overcome but form part of contested land-use debates already present in Europe. Exact definitions or estimations of marginal land are unlikely to overcome land-use debates because land-use decisions are subject to the same competing claims and hence normative decisions as land-use decisions around productive land. These marginal land frames reflect a vision for how land should be used; for food, feed, fuel or nature. We argue that exact estimations of marginal land are unlikely to fix controversies on land-use due to the inherent ambiguity of marginal land. Instead, we believe that deliberative science-policy relationships are needed.

Pastoralists have traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), which is important for their livelihoods and for policies and interventions. Pastoralism is under pressure, however, which may result in a decline of pastoral lifestyle and its related TEK. We, therefore, addressed the following objectives (i) to inventorise and assess how pastoralists characterise and value soils and forages in their environment, (ii) to analyse how soil, forage and livestock (i.e. cattle) characteristics relate to herding decisions and (iii) to determine whether TEK underlying herding decisions differs across generations. Data were collected through focus groups and individual interviews with 72 pastoralists, belonging to three generations and to three agro-ecological zones. Using a three-point scale (high, medium, low), four grasses and three tree forages were assessed in terms of nutritional quality for milk, meat, health and strength. Using their own visual criteria, pastoralists identified five different soils, which they selected for herding at different times of the year. Pastoralists stated that Pokuri was the best soil because of its low moisture content, whereas Karaal was the worst because forage hardly grows on it. They stated that perennials, such as Andropogon gayanus and Loxoderra ledermannii, were of high nutritional quality, whereas annuals such as Andropogon pseudapricus and Hyparrhenia involucrata were of low nutritional quality. Afzelia africana was perceived of high quality for milk production, whereas Khaya senegalensis had the highest quality for meat, health and strength. Pastoralists first used soil, then forage and finally livestock characteristics in their herding decisions. Pastoralists' TEK was not associated with their generations, but with their agro-ecological zones. This study suggests that pastoralists had common and detailed TEK about soils, forages and livestock characteristics, underlying their herding decisions. To conclude, pastoralists use a holistic approach, combining soil, vegetation and livestock TEK in herding decisions. Such TEK can guide restoration or improvement of grazing lands, and land use planning.

Pastoralists face increasing competition for land with crop farmers and nature in and around the W Biosphere Reserve (WBR) in Benin. Our aim was to describe and analyse land use changes in order to understand their drivers, and to describe and analyse the viewpoints of relevant stakeholders in order to understand the competition for land. To this end, remote sensing data, regional statistics, and survey data were collected. We found that crop land expansion around the WBR was the direct driver of decrease of the grazing land area. Population growth and rising demand for food crops, and government support to the cotton sector were indirect drivers of grazing land reduction. Furthermore, competing claims on land among users arose from the complex interaction of crop expansion, presence of WBR and the way it is governed, the lack of support to pastoralists, and the increasing shift of pastoralists’ lifestyle into one of settled crop farmers. Pastoralism is under threat and its survival depends on the successful implementation of policies to support pastoralists and protect grazing lands. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13280-017-0942-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Developments in agriculture are a main driver for biodiversity loss, in which livestock play a major role through pastures and feed crop cultivation. Addressing biodiversity loss is challenging due to the broad definition of and the multitude of indicators for biodiversity. We reviewed scientific literature assessing effects of livestock on biodiversity in Europe, to provide an overview of general characteristics of these studies and their indicators for biodiversity. The search was performed in SCOPUS and Web of Science and yielded 857 records after deduplication, which was narrowed down to 131 articles that assessed biodiversity impacts of livestock in Europe. Analysis of these articles focused on general characteristics of the research (i.e. context, scale, species, function of livestock, approach), indicators used, and the general conclusion regarding the impact of livestock on biodiversity. The majority of articles studied biodiversity in France, UK, Italy, Germany and Spain; and studied the direct impact of grazing cattle and sheep on biodiversity at field scale. Indirect impacts of livestock on biodiversity through feed production were assessed in few studies. In about one third of the studies, the function of livestock was not related to food production, but to conservation of open landscapes through grazing. We found a large variety of indicators used to assess the impact of livestock on biodiversity. The indicators were divided in seven clusters: 1) DNA, breeds, populations, 2) abundance and richness, 3) traditional diversity indices, 4) novel diversity indices, 5) composition and function, 6) structure and habitats, and 7) qualitative scoring systems. The majority of studies included the indicators abundance and richness, although studies differed in the plant or animal species studied. Indicators used differed across scales and between functions of livestock. Studies with a conservation function of livestock more often used indicators from clusters 5 and 6 than studies with a food production function. A positive impact of livestock on biodiversity was often found in studies with a conservation function, whereas a negative impact of more intensive livestock was often found in studies with a food production function. The identified indicators for biodiversity were connected to different assumptions and values, and therefore answer different questions and present different conclusions regarding the state of biodiversity. This review provides insight in biodiversity assessments of livestock across scales and purposes; highlights that few studies linked livestock to their indirect impacts on biodiversity; and stresses that one should be critical about the indicators used for biodiversity.

Our aim was to examine the perceptions of farmers and nonfarmers regarding the relationships between agriculture and the environment in High Nature Value (HNV) farmland. We performed content analysis of information obtained from five focus groups to derive key items (recording units such as words, phrases and concepts) and classify the derived items into a set of themes: agricultural practices, ecosystem services, and economic and social sustainability. We established the relative importance of each item and the relationships among the items. The farmers were very knowledgeable of ecosystem services (particularly regulation), the interactions among them, and their relationships with agricultural practices, particularly grazing management. Nonfarmers were less knowledgeable of ecosystem services, particularly regulation, and identified fewer relationships with agricultural practices. However, nonfarmers were highly concerned about the provision of quality food products and several cultural ecosystem services, which were discussed in bundles. The provisioning of food with particular quality attributes was revealed to be important for participants and a distinctive feature of HNV farmland. Ecosystem services were frequently interwoven with broad issues of economic and social sustainability. Therefore, a systemic view should be considered when designing agri-environmental policies.

Biodiversity is declining and current strategies to halt biodiversity loss have not succeeded. In preparing the EU’s Biodiversity Strategy 2030, it is essential to unravel different visions about conservation targets for agriculture, and to understand potential trade-offs with food production. In this research, we translated the narratives of experts into two conservation scenarios on a case study area resembling the Dutch dairy sector. The scenarios reflected a targeted versus a generic approach towards conservation. In the targeted conservation (TC) scenario, extensive grassland, reduced drainage and delayed mowing were applied in core areas to enhance meadow bird abundance, whereas in the generic conservation (GC) scenario, networks of nature and extensive agriculture were created and no feed was imported, which required a change in local agricultural land use. Subsequently, total feed and food (milk and meat) production and potential impacts on biodiversity were assessed, using the total energy and protein value for dairy, dairy productivity and the potentially disappeared fraction (PDF) of plant species richness. Land use changed on 6% of the case study area in the TC scenario, and 69 % in the GC scenario. Feed production per ha (net energy for lactation) was reduced by 3% for the TC and 41 % for the GC scenario. Food production on the case study area reduced to the same extent in TC, and to a larger extent (by about two thirds) in GC because no feed was imported. In consequence, biodiversity increased, thus reducing the PDF from 0.17 in the baseline scenario to 0.16 in the TC scenario and 0.10 in the GC scenario. In both scenarios, extensive grassland offset part of the loss in plant species richness caused by cropland and intensive grassland. Implementing these opposing scenarios requires different policy approaches or incentives for the dairy sector. Moreover, judging whether measures are worth the expected benefits for biodiversity depends on stakeholders’ values. Lastly, potential displacement of food production and associated impact on biodiversity needs to be considered.

Mineral phosphorus (P) used to fertilise crops is derived from phosphate rock, which is a finite resource. Preventing and recycling mineral P waste in the food system, therefore, are essential to sustain future food security and long-term availability of mineral P. The aim of our modelling exercise was to assess the potential of preventing and recycling P waste in a food system, in order to reduce the dependency on phosphate rock. To this end, we modelled a hypothetical food system designed to produce sufficient food for a fixed population with a minimum input requirement of mineral P. This model included representative crop and animal production systems, and was parameterised using data from the Netherlands. We assumed no import or export of feed and food. We furthermore assumed small P soil losses and no net P accumulation in soils, which is typical for northwest European conditions. We first assessed the minimum P requirement in a baseline situation, that is 42% of crop waste is recycled, and humans derived 60% of their dietary protein from animals (PA). Results showed that about 60% of the P waste in this food system resulted from wasting P in human excreta. We subsequently evaluated P input for alternative situations to assess the (combined) effect of: (1) preventing waste of crop and animal products, (2) fully recycling waste of crop products, (3) fully recycling waste of animal products and (4) fully recycling human excreta and industrial processing water. Recycling of human excreta showed most potential to reduce P waste from the food system, followed by prevention and finally recycling of agricultural waste. Fully recycling P could reduce mineral P input by 90%. Finally, for each situation, we studied the impact of consumption of PA in the human diet from 0% to 80%. The optimal amount of animal protein in the diet depended on whether P waste from animal products was prevented or fully recycled: if it was, then a small amount of animal protein in the human diet resulted in the most sustainable use of P; but if it was not, then the most sustainable use of P would result from a complete absence of animal protein in the human diet. Our results apply to our hypothetical situation. The principles included in our model however, also hold for food systems with, for example, different climatic and soil conditions, farming practices, representative types of crops and animals and population densities.

Animal genetic resources (AnGR) are essential for food security and the livelihoods of many pastoralists. However, the AnGR diversity is currently being eroded, as well as the traditional ecological knowledge associated to the use of indigenous breeds and their environment. The objectives of this study were to: i) inventorise indigenous breeds of cattle and their performance in selected traits, ii) analyse pastoralists’ preferences for specific breeds and reasons for that, and iii) determine whether the knowledge about breeds and their traits was transmitted across generations and was consistent across agro-ecological zones. Data were collected through focus groups discussions, and individual interviews with 72 pastoralists. Interviewees belonged to three generations and three agro-ecological zones in the periphery of the W Biosphere Reserve in Benin. From the focus groups discussions we identified the most common breeds in the region (i.e. Keteeji, Jaliji, Bodeji, Tchiwali and Gudali) and the most relevant traits (i.e. milk production, meat production, endurance and tolerance to trypanosomiasis) to assess cattle breeds according to pastoralists. Individual interviewees scored the performance of cattle breeds in the four main traits based on a three-point scale. Finally, we determined the consistency of pastoralists’ knowledge across generations and agro-ecological zones. Keteeji was valued for its endurance and tolerance to trypanosomiasis, Bodeeji was highly valued for endurance and Gudali was perceived of high value for meat and milk production, but of low value for endurance. Keteeji was the preferred breed by the majority of the pastoralists (nearly 50%), especially for the adaptive trait withstanding hunger. Gudali was the least preferred breed (11%). 80% of pastoralists selected a preferred cattle breed based on adaptive traits, i.e. withstanding hunger, intelligence (beyond obedience to herder) or withstanding disease. Pastoralists’ knowledge about breed traits did not differ among generations, but some differences appeared among agro-ecological zones. This study suggests that pastoralists prefer adaptive traits of breeds over production traits to deal with the changing and unfavourable conditions of their environment.

The physiological response to concentrate supplementation in low milk potential ewe breeds has been scarcely studied. The aim of this experiment was to evaluate the effects of concentrate inclusion on feed intake, blood metabolites and milk yield and milk fatty acids (FA) composition of ewes raising lambs under forage-based diets. During the last 10 weeks of pregnancy (pre-partum period) and the 6 weeks of lactation (post-partum period), ewes were fed forage hay ad libitum with or without concentrate (inclusion of 300 g/day in pre-partum period and 750 g/day in post-partum) in a 2×2 factorial arrangement. The inclusion of concentrate did not affect the forage intake in pre-partum period (P>0.05), whereas during the post-partum feed intake was similar between treatments during weeks 1 and 2 of lactation, but thereafter it was greater in ewes receiving concentrate supplementation (P 0.05). During lactation, ewes supplemented with concentrate showed a replacement rate between 16% and 31%, being greatest during the first 3 weeks of lactation than afterwards (P 0.05) but this practice increased milk yield during lactation (P 0.05) except PUFA n-3 content (P 0.05), except plasma β-hydroxybutyrate during the pre-partum period, which was greater in purely forage-fed ewes (P

Intensifying animal production is generally advocated to mitigate greenhouse gases emissions associated with production of animal-source food. Sheep farming systems (SFSs) in Spain are generally considered to be pasture-based and extensive, but large differences in input utilization, land use and intensification level exist. Their environmental impacts, therefore, are expected to differ also. We used life cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions of three contrasting meat-sheep farming systems in Spain, which differed in their degree of intensification (reproduction rate, land use and grazing management). The GHGs emissions of these systems varied from 19.5 to 25.9 kg CO2-eq per kg of lamb live weight, or 39.0–51.7 kg CO2-eq per kg of lamb meat, with highest values referring to the pasture-based livestock system. In addition to meat, however, these SFSs also provide other services to society (e.g. public goods such as biodiversity and landscape conservation). We valued these services for each SFSs based on agri-environmental subsidies of the EU and used farm economic values to allocate GHGs emissions of SFSs between meat and cultural ecosystem services. When accounting for multifunctionality, GHGs emission per kg of lamb live weight among the SFSs was reversed: with lowest values for the pasture-based system (13.9 kg CO2-eq per kg of lamb live weight) and highest for zero-grazing system (19.5 kg CO2-eq per kg of lamb live weight). A comparison of GHGs emissions among SFSs should account for the multifunctionality of pasture-based livestock systems.

The aim of the study was evaluate the use of forage diets (grazing pasture vs. hay) around ewe parturition on the performance and meat quality of suckling lambs (10–12 kg bodyweight). Forty-eight multiparous single bearing ewes from the Churra Tensina breed were used. The experimental treatments were conducted during the last 5 weeks of pregnancy (pre-partum period) and the 5 weeks of lactation (post-partum period) in a 2 × 2 factorial design. Ewes were fed ad libitum on mountain pastures or pasture hay. Hay was made in late spring from the same pasture paddocks to those grazed in autumn. Results showed that ewes body-weight (BW) and body condition score (BCS) were not affected by forage type feed around ewe parturition. The week post-partum had a more determinant effect on milk production and composition than forage type pre- and post-partum. The energy-corrected milk yield peaked on first week of lactation (1.39 l/day, P < 0.05), and decreased significantly from week 3 post-partum onwards (1.29 l/day vs. 1.02 l/day, P < 0.05). Forage type supplied to ewes during the pre-partum period did not affect any of the studied variables on lambs. During post-partum period forage type had effect on lamb ADG, which was higher in grazing system than in hay feed (259 g/day vs. 220 g/day). Consequently, age at slaughter was greater in lambs raised by ewes receiving hay post-partum compared to grazing ewes (36 days vs. 32 days, P < 0.05). Caudal fat colour was affected only by post-partum forage type, showing grazing group greater redness, yellowness and absolute value of the integral of the translated spectrum (SUM) than that forage type (P < 0.05). Carcasses from lambs raised by post-partum grazing ewes led to a muscle with lower lightness and yellowness and greater redness than hay forage type (P < 0.05). Lambs whose dams grazed presented a higher visual appraisal score at cutting time, however these differences disappeared as time advanced. Grazing forage had a positive effect on consumer purchasing decision (P < 0.10). In conclusion, forage type in pre-partum period did not affect the studied parameters whereas ewes grazing on mountain pastures after autumn-lambing improved lamb performance without any detrimental effect on carcass and instrumental meat quality.

In the European Mediterranean basin, pasture-based sheep farming systems are mostly located in marginal/High Nature Value areas. These production systems are multifunctional, and their economic, environmental and social roles are equally important and recognised by policy makers and by society. However, the number of animals and holdings is decreasing, and there is great uncertainty regarding the reproducibility of these farming systems, which depends on many internal and external farm factors and their interactions. The aim of this paper was to perform a comprehensive assessment of sustainability in different sheep farming systems in north eastern Spain using the MESMIS framework. We followed a case-study approach to perform an in-depth investigation of 4 sheep meat and dairy farms with different intensities of reproduction management. Critical points of sustainability, including weaknesses and opportunities, were obtained using a participatory process with stakeholders (farmers and technical advisers) that resulted in the selection of 37 sustainability indicators that were classified according to the systemic attributes defined by MESMIS (productivity, stability, self-reliance, adaptability, equity) and according to the classical sustainability pillars (social, economic and environmental). Some underlying patterns could be observed when analysing sustainability pillars, attributes and indicators. A positive relationship between productivity and intensification level in meat farms was observed; however, economic sustainability was determined not only by on-farm but also by off-farm activities. The economic efficiency of farming (without considering subsidies) was mainly explained by the capture of added value in the dairy systems and the combination of high animal productivity as well as high forage and feed self-sufficiency in the meat systems. Social issues were also central to explaining sustainability at the farm level, including the prospects of generational turnover and the manner in which farmers perceive and rate their activity. A clear trade-off between economic and environmental indicators was observed, i.e., the higher the economic sustainability, the lower the environmental sustainability. Each farm scored differently for diverse attributes, pillars and individual indicators. The scores differed according to size, structure, resource availability and managerial skills, which implies that it would be difficult to apply a holistic sustainability analysis to farming systems instead of individual farms. A number of methodological questions arose during the evaluation process relative to the stakeholders perception of these indicators, their relevance and meaning, the reference values for comparison, or their validity to assess sustainability across spatial and temporal scales. These questions are discussed in the paper.

This experiment tested the hypothesis that alfalfa-raised light lambs suckling their mothers until slaughter (22–24 kg) and having concentrate ad libitum may consume forage to achieve a similar performance to their weaned concentrate-fed counterparts. Thirty-two single Rasa Aragonesa lambs were assigned to one of four treatments in a 2 × 2 factorial design. The factors were the inclusion of forage in the diet (alfalfa grazing vs. concentrate-fed indoors) and lactation length (weaning at a target body-weight (BW) of 13 kg vs. suckling until slaughter). After slaughter, the digestive contents of each gastrointestinal compartment were weighed individually and the pH of the rumen and caecum contents was recorded. Samples of the reticulo-rumen, caecum and colon-rectum contents were collected for neutral-detergent fibre (NDF), acid-detergent fibre (ADF) and lignin analysis. The empty BW was not affected by forage inclusion or suckling (P > 0.05). The fresh reticulo-rumen and whole digestive tract contents (liquids + solids) were greater in weaned alfalfa-fed than in suckling alfalfa-fed lambs (P 0.05). On a dry matter (DM) basis, these digestive contents did not differ between alfalfa and concentrate-fed lambs (P > 0.05), but they were greater in weaned than in suckling lambs (P 0.05). The lowest reticulo-rumen ADF and lignin contents were observed in both groups of concentrate-fed lambs (P 0.05). The caecum and colon-rectum ADF contents were greater in alfalfa-fed than in concentrate-fed lambs (P

Climate change (CC) directly impacts the economy, ecosystems, water resources, weather events, health issues, desertification, sea level rise, and even political and social stability. The effects of CC affect different groups of societies differently. In Tanzania, the effects of CC have even acquired a gender dimension, whereby women are viewed as more vulnerable than men because of socioeconomic and historic barriers. CC is largely caused by anthropogenic activities, including those that increase the concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere. Recent findings indicate that the livestock sector is responsible for 18 % of GHG emissions measured in the CO2 equivalent. Moreover, some gases emitted by livestock have higher potential to warm the atmosphere than CO2 and have a very long atmospheric lifetime. Methane (CH4) has 23 times the global warming potential (GWP) of CO2, whereas nitrous oxide (N2O) has 296 times the GWP of CO2. It is now estimated that the atmospheric concentrations of CH4 and N2O are increasing at a rate of approximately 0.6 % and 0.25 % per year, respectively. Cattle may emit CH4 from enteric fermentation equivalent to 2–12 % of the ingested energy, whereas produced manure can emit N2O up to 1.25 % of its weight. The estimated total CH4 and N2O emissions from Tanzanian ruminants stand at 26.17 Gg and 0.57 Gg, respectively. In this paper, we first very briefly review emissions of GHGs from different livestock production systems in Tanzania with the view of identifying the main hot spots. Then, we concentrate on the available adaptation options and the limitations on the adoption of such adaptation options in Tanzania. Emission of these GHGs per unit product varies with the level of intensification, the types of livestock kept, and manure management. Intensification of livestock production reduces the size of the land required to sustain a livestock unit and frees up the land necessary for carbon sequestration. In Tanzania, such intensification could take the form of the early harvesting and storing forage for dry-season feeding. The advantage of this intervention is twofold: young harvests have higher digestibility and emit less CH4 when fed to ruminants than mature lignified forage; use of stored roughage in the dry season will reduce the desertification of rangeland and deforestation that occur when livestock search for pastureland. Dry-season supplementation of ruminants with energy and protein-rich diets will reduce CH4 emission. The chemical treatment of crops byproducts will increase the crops’ digestibility and reduce CH4 emission from ruminants. Crossbreds of indigenous and exotic breeds are more efficient converters of feed into products like meat and milk, with less GHG emitted per unit product. The use of manure for biogas production will reduce the emission of both CH4 and N2O into the atmosphere. Shifting from liquid to solid manure management has the potential to reduce CH4 emissions. Most of these interventions, however, are not cost neutral – enhancing awareness alone will not lead to their widespread adoption. In the absence of subsidies, the adoption of these interventions will depend on the relative cost of other options. Although some traditional livestock systems in Tanzania are already coping with the impact of CC, such efforts are handicapped by inadequate resources, poor coordination, and implementation of competing measures.

Sheep farming systems in Spain are experiencing an intensification process, characterised by a general selection criteria of enhancing prolificacy in ewes, and by increasing indoor feeding with concentrates to the detriment of grazing. This study evaluated the effects of concentrate supplementation and prolificacy on productive and economic performance of a local sheep breed in different price scenarios. Ewes were fed forage hay ad libitum, without (in prepartum period, PRE-HAY; and in post-partum period, POST-HAY) or with concentrates (300 g d–1 in pre-partum period, PRE-CON; and 750 g d–1 in post-partum period, POST-CON). The inclusion of concentrate during the pre-partum period (last 10 weeks of pregnancy) had no effect on the productive performance of the ewes. In contrast, the inclusion of concentrate in the post-partum period (6 weeks), resulted in greater milk yield (1009 vs. 1275 ± 89 g d–1), lamb average daily gain (151 ± 12 vs. 225 ± 19 g d–1) and lamb output (kg of lamb LW weaned). However, the greater productivity thanks to the use of concentrates did not always turn into greatest profitability, since the economic margin was highly influenced by the cost of the diet and extremely subjected to variability in price of concentrates. Hence, the inclusion of concentrates in sheep meat production was not always justified in economic terms. In conclusion, the use of concentrates should only be considered as long as prices of commodities remain low, and inadvisable when prices reach a certain threshold or are subject to certain volatility in markets.

The concept of ‘Ecosystem Services’ (ES) focuses on the linkages between ecosystems, including agroecosystems, and human well-being, referring to all the benefits, direct and indirect, that people obtain from ecosystems. In this paper, we review the application of the ES framework to pasture-based livestock farming systems, which allows (1) regulating, supporting and cultural ES to be integrated at the same level with provisioning ES, and (2) the multiple trade-offs and synergies that exist among ES to be considered. Research on livestock farming has focused mostly on provisioning ES (meat, milk and fibre production), despite the fact that provisioning ES strongly depends on regulating and supporting ES for their existence. We first present an inventory of the non-provisioning ES (regulating, supporting and cultural) provided by pasture-based livestock systems in Europe. Next, we review the trade-offs between provisioning and non-provisioning ES at multiple scales and present an overview of the methodologies for assessing biophysical trade-offs. Third, we present non-biophysical (economical and socio-cultural) methodologies and applications for ES valuation. We conclude with some recommendations for policy design. Published

Traditional mixed livestock cereal- and pasture-based sheep farming systems in Europe are threatened by intensification and specialisation processes. However, the intensification process does not always yield improved economic results or efficiency. This study involved a group of farmers that raised an autochthonous sheep breed (Ojinegra de Teruel) in an unfavourable area of North-East Spain. This study aimed to typify the farms and elucidate the existing links between economic performance and certain sustainability indicators (i.e. productivity, self-sufficiency and diversification). Information was obtained through direct interviews with 30 farms (73% of the farmers belonging to the breeders association). Interviews were conducted in 2009 and involved 32 indicators regarding farm structure, management and economic performance. With a principal component analysis, three factors were obtained explaining 77.9% of the original variance. This factors were named as inputs/self-sufficiency, which included the use of on-farm feeds, the amount of variable costs per ewe and economic performance; productivity, which included lamb productivity and economic autonomy; and productive orientation, which included the degree of specialisation in production. A cluster analysis identified the following four groups of farms: high-input intensive system; low-input self-sufficient system; specialised livestock system; and diversified crops-livestock system. In conclusion, despite the large variability between and within groups, the following factors that explain the economic profitability of farms were identified: (i) high feed self-sufficiency and low variable costs enhance the economic performance (per labour unit) of the farms; (ii) animal productivity reduces subsidy dependence, but does not necessarily imply better economic performance; and (iii) diversity of production enhances farm flexibility, but is not related to economic performance. Published

The sustainability of livestock farming systems (LFS) in relation to climate change, population dynamics, food security and provision of agro-ecosystem services has become a central issue of public and scientific debate. Mediterranean pasture-based LFS differ from industrial systems in terms of utilization of natural resources, inputs use and production; besides, the socio-economic, environmental and cultural context is different and so they are the key factors affecting their sustainability. The objective of this paper is to describe a methodological process to select, measure and integrate relevant indicators into a holistic evaluation framework of sustainability for pasture- based LFS. First, we identify critical points of sustainability using a participatory SWOT analysis. Second, we describe, measure and classify indicators according to different systemic attributes of farming systems (productivity, stability/ resilience, adaptability, equity, self-reliance) and pillars of sustainability (economic, social, environmental). Third, we illustrate the integration of these indicators into a global evaluation framework called MESMIS, using for this purpose a case study of Spanish sheep farming systems.

We review 75 studies on the competition for biomass and production resources such as land, water, labour and capital across food, feed and fuel production. We identified seven factors that are key to the availability and effective use of biomass and production resources. These ranged from ones related to production, such as crop yields to ones related to policy. Many of these factors resulted in trade-offs across different uses of biomass. Studies had different perspectives (e.g. economic, biophysical) on setting priorities for biomass and suggested different solutions to address competition (e.g. marginal lands). To connect these perspectives we suggest a framework that prioritises biomass and production resources for the use of human food before its use as feed or bioenergy.

Humanity’s growing demand for food, feed, bioenergy and biomaterials put pressure on agroecosystems and the biosphere. If these trends continue, the capacity of agroecosystems to feed the planet while also providing for humanity’s energy and material needs is at risk. This demand cause interactions and trade-offs between different biomass uses, competition for biomass and other natural and economic resources. Governing these interactions is difficult, because of the inherent complexity of these interactions but also due to the diversity of biomass resources, the diversity of policy domains and institutions that are needed to govern them. However, there is limited knowledge on the interactions between different biomass uses and how these may result in trade-offs and synergies. Furthermore, little is known how these trade-offs and synergies may affect policy coherence and what solutions are needed to achieve more sustainable biomass use. With its leading role in bioenergy and bioeconomy policy, the European Union (EU) plays a key role in debates surrounding biomass. This thesis, therefore, aims to advance the theoretical and empirical understanding of the governance of biomass with the ultimate aim of improving the governance process at the science-policy interface, taking the EU as a case study.Chapter 2 provides an overview of the driving factors behind the growing demands for biomass as well as the trade-offs and synergies across different biomass uses. To do this, we conducted a systematic review of 75 studies that looked at competition between biomass uses and the resources that support them (i.e. water, land, labour and capital). We found seven factors that drive the availability of biomass and resources namely: increased bioenergy demand, increased crop yields, increase of human-edible feed, amount of animal-source food in human diets, efficiency of food supply chains, type of bioenergy feedstock and implementation of land-use policies. These shaped the biophysical option-space, determining which interactions (neutral), trade-offs (negative) and synergies (positive) between food, feed, fuel goals. We found that the majority of the effects implied trade-offs. For example, the factor of increasing bioenergy demand resulted in trade-offs with other natural resources such as increased land-use and land-use change, increased water consumption, and increased nitrogen demand. It also resulted in trade-offs with economic resources, leading to increasing food prices and higher land rents. A diversity of solutions was recommended by the literature to deal with these trade-offs and these ranged from production-side, governance, losses and wastes and consumption-side solutions. We found that these different types of solutions came from different disciplinary perspectives, each setting different priorities for biomass. To connect these perspectives, we suggested a framework where priority is given to basic human needs for the consumption of biomass.Given the many trade-offs between biomass uses, it is difficult for policies to manage issues that cut across different policy domains. Given these trade-offs, biomass will become an increasingly important resource in the bioeconomy and will require careful and sustainable management. The bioeconomy will therefore require coherence between many different policy domains. In chapter 3 we conducted a study of policy coherence between these policy domains. To do this we conducted a qualitative content analysis of 41 EU policy documents across 5 policy domains, namely agro-food, bio-based industry, waste, energy and environment. Coherency was measured by using a survey and focus groups based on expert opinion across scientific fields. We utilised both a coherency score using a 7-point Likert scale and measures of confidence and disagreement. The results of the survey indicate that bioeconomy policy goals and agro-food policy goals are largely considered to be consistent and that synergies outweigh trade-offs, both in quantity and in strength. However, there was disagreement and mixed confidence among respondents on whether different goals were synergistic or conflicting. Digging further into the results using focus groups, we found uncertainty and context dependencies in the scientific knowledge-base, particularly concerning waste and bio-based industry. We categorised these uncertainties into five types, and distinguish between ambiguity, which arises from different incommensurable ways of framing a problem and vagueness which leaves concepts undefined. We conclude that a shift towards a bioeconomy will have to acknowledge the interactions between different policy goals across the different sectors and avoid ‘silo-thinking’. This can be achieved through overcoming vagueness in policies, such as having clear cascading guidelines for biomass.Building on the findings of chapter 2, where we found that marginal lands was recommended as a solution to food-feed-fuel competition, in chapter 4 we conducted a framing analysis of the narrative frames surrounding marginal lands in EU science and policy-making. We wanted to know how different scientific and policy stakeholders looked at marginal lands and what problems and solutions marginal lands address. We found a total of eight frames utilised by a diversity of actors: i) the Sustainable Bioenergy frame ii) the Precautionary Principle frame iii) the Marginal Land Critique frame iv) the Food Security frame v) the Land Rights frame vi) the Rural Development frame vii) the Ecosystem Restoration frame and viii) the Low-Cost Livestock frame. We related these to four debates taking place in the EU related to land use; discussions about the effect of indirect-land use change, biofuels, rural development and the sustainability of food systems. Rather than overcoming debates about land use, marginal lands are subject to the same competing claims as productive land. We argued that the ambiguity of the term ‘marginal land’ is a type of uncertainty that results from multiple ways of framing an issue, leaving no clear idea of what is the problem or what should be done about it. Deliberative approaches are needed where framing debates can form the starting point. Given the many trade-offs that arise due to growing demands, a sustainable way of utilising biomass is needed. In chapter 5 we suggested that a circular bio-based economy could provide a pathway to more sustainable use of biomass. Here we presented five ecological principles to guide biomass use towards a more circular bioeconomy: 1) safeguarding and regenerating the health of our agroecosystems; 2) avoiding the production of non-essential products and waste of essential ones; 3) using biomass streams for basic human needs; 4) utilising and recycling all by-products of agroecosystems, and 5) prioritising renewable energy and minimising energy use. We also identified institutional, technological, organisational, behavioural, cultural and market barriers that may halt the required transformation. For each set of barriers, we identified opportunities for change which were leverage points that can bring about transformative change. By involving stakeholders, leaving room for ambiguity, having an ambitious vision for change and a mix of top-down and bottom-up governance approaches, these principles can be operationalised.Chapter 6 brings the insights of the preceding chapters together by answering three questions. First, what are the key interactions, trade-offs and synergies in biomass uses in both science and policy? I argued that high demands, particularly for bioenergy and animal-source food, limit the biophysical option space, resulting in multiple trade-offs. Bioenergy and agricultural systems are closely interconnected and the diversion of high-value biomass streams to bioenergy can cause negative environmental impacts. Furthermore, the solutions recommended for biomass competition, such as marginal lands, remain unclear. By looking at policy coherence, I showed a policy of biomass cascading and renewable energy policies are a source of trade-offs as well as key synergies. My second question was, how can science and policy deal with complexity, ambiguity and uncertainty? Here I suggested that defining between different types of uncertainty can lead to understanding which uncertainties can be reduced and which require different approaches. These approaches include changing models of scientific advice and changing modes of governance. Third, what practical steps can be made towards more sustainable use of biomass? I suggested practical ways forward in relation to more sustainable use of biomass, such as taking a more integrated view of biomass and defining a cascading principle for biomass emerging from our ecological principles in Chapter 5. Moving towards a more sustainable use of biomass will not be easy and will require a societal transition. By redefining what we value, directing biomass towards human needs and paying as much attention to the social foundation as to the biophysical boundaries, humanity can change its relationship with the biosphere and continue to develop and thrive for generations to come.

The competition for land has become an issue of major concern and cause of conflict, especially between pastoralists and crop farmers, but also between pastoralists and nature conservation institutions. The Biosphere Reserve of W in Benin Republic (WBR) and its surrounding lands are located in the agro-pastoral contact zone in West Africa, enabling competition for land, and affecting the relations between pastoralism and its environment. The general aim of this thesis, therefore, was to understand the relations between pastoralism and its changing natural environment. In terms of land use change, cropland area around WBR expanded, whereas grazing area reduced. Population growth and rising demand for food crops and cash crops were the indirect causes of this loss of grazing lands. Competing claims over land existed between crop farmers and pastoralists, among crop farmers, and among crop farmers, pastoralists, and the WBR authority due to past expropriation, unfair and incomplete implementation of the WBR regulations and the increasing shift of pastoral lifestyle to crop farming. In terms of effects of grazing on plant communities, highly grazed sites had more species diversity than lowly grazed sites. This suggests that the current level of grazing was not damaging plant communities’ diversity. Annual species dominated the surveyed vegetation, suggesting that restoration of grazing lands with perennials requires human intervention. Herding involves taking decisions and moving of livestock in search for feed. Herding decisions are based on traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) of soil, forage and livestock. Pastoralists identified five different soils, which they selected for herding at different times of the year. Perennial grasses were perceived of high nutritional quality, whereas annuals were of low nutritional quality. Afzelia africana had high perceived quality for milk production, whereas Khaya senegalensis had the highest perceived quality for meat production, health and strength. In decision making for herding, pastoralists used a holistic approach, combining TEK about soil, vegetation and livestock, in a structured and prioritised reasoning. Changes in the pastoral system can lead to changes in desired livestock traits, which may lead to loss of indigenous breeds. Keteeji was valued for its endurance and tolerance to trypanosomiasis, Bodeeji was highly valued for endurance and Gudali was perceived of high value for meat and milk production, but of low value for endurance. To deal with the changing and unfavourable conditions of their environment, pastoralists preferred cattle breeds performing well on adaptive traits i.e. withstanding hunger, intelligence, and withstanding disease. Our results suggest that pastoralism is under pressure and that its survival depends on policies. In the pessimistic scenario, i.e. without any change, pastoralists will use, likely, the stepping-out strategy in the future. In the optimistic scenario, two possible institutional interventions could help maintaining pastoralism in the region: payments for ecosystem services provided by pastoralism, and association of pastoralism with nature conservation. In practice, however, the implementation of these two interventions is very challenging, which implies an increasing vulnerability of pastoralists and pastoral lifestyle.