Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:45:22.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ecological impact of wheat and spelt production under industrial and alternative farming systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 August 2011

Martina Bavec ,
Michael Narodoslawsky ,
Franc Bavec  and
Matjaž Turinek
Martina Bavec
Affiliation:
Institute for Organic Farming, Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Maribor, Pivola 10, SI-2311 Hoče, Slovenia.
Michael Narodoslawsky
Affiliation:
Institute for Resource Efficient and Sustainable Systems, Graz University of Technology, Inffeldgasse 21 B, A-8010 Graz, Austria.
Franc Bavec
Affiliation:
Institute for Organic Farming, Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Maribor, Pivola 10, SI-2311 Hoče, Slovenia.
Matjaž Turinek*
Affiliation:
Institute for Organic Farming, Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Maribor, Pivola 10, SI-2311 Hoče, Slovenia.
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Industrial Revolution and intensification of agriculture have, in some cases, led to economic activities that profoundly influenced the ecosystem to the point where environmental stability and geographic political security are jeopardized. The uncertainty about oil reserves, rising energy prices and the threat of harmful climate change effects has intensified the search for alternative farming systems that reduce negative environmental impact. This study reports the ecological impact of conventional (CON), integrated (INT), organic (ORG) and biodynamic (BD) farming systems calculated from data collected in a field trial at Maribor, Slovenia, and interpreted using the SPIonExcel tool. This tool is a member of the ecological footprint family and describes the area necessary to embed a human activity sustainably into the ecosphere. Three-year results show a markedly reduced ecological footprint of the ORG and BD systems in production of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. ‘Antonius’) and spelt (Triticum spelta L. ‘Ebners rotkorn’), mainly due to the absence of external production factors. When yields were also considered, the ORG and BD systems again had a reduced overall footprint per product unit and increased ecological efficiency of production. Thus, ORG and BD farming systems present viable alternatives for reducing the impact of agriculture on environmental degradation and climate change. Nevertheless, room for improvement exists in the area of machinery use in all systems studied and yield improvement in the ORG farming system.

Keywords

production systemsorganic farmingbiodynamic farmingecological footprintSPIecological efficiency of production
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , September 2012 , pp. 242 - 250
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Rees, W. and Wackernagel, M. 1996. Urban ecological footprints: Why cities cannot be sustainable – and why they are a key to sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 16:223–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Scialabba, N. and Muller-Lindenlauf, M. 2010. Organic agriculture and climate change. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 25:158–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3WCED. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
4Veleva, V., Hart, M., Greiner, T., and Crumbley, C. 2001. Indicators of sustainable production. Journal of Cleaner Production 9:447–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Lenzen, M. and Murray, S.A. 2001. A modified ecological footprint method and its application to Australia. Ecological Economics 37:229–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Chen, G., Jiang, M., Yang, Z., Chen, B., Ji, X., and Zhou, J. 2009. Exergetic assessment for ecological economic system: Chinese agriculture. Ecological Modelling 220:397–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Haberl, H., Erb, K., and Krausmann, F. 2001. How to calculate and interpret ecological footprints for long periods of time: the case of Austria 1926–1995. Ecological Economics 38:25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Curran, M. 2008. Life-cycle assessment. In Encyclopedia of Ecology. Academic Press, Oxford. p. 2168–2174. Available at Web site http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B9636-4SY6CH0-65/2/2e654cee8012428556d25f07fb80fb49 (accessed July 26, 2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9van der Werf, H.M., Tzilivakis, J., Lewis, K., and Basset-Mens, C. 2007. Environmental impacts of farm scenarios according to five assessment methods. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 118:327–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10Narodoslawsky, M. and Krotscheck, C. 1995. The sustainable process index (SPI): evaluating processes according to environmental compatibility. Journal of Hazardous Materials 41:383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Krotscheck, C. and Narodoslawsky, M. 1996. The Sustainable Process Index a new dimension in ecological evaluation. Ecological Engineering 6:241–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Narodoslawsky, M. and Krotscheck, C. 2000. Integrated ecological optimization of processes with the sustainable process index. Waste Management 20:599–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13Sandholzer, D. and Narodoslawsky, M. 2007. SPIonExcel – Fast and easy calculation of the Sustainable Process Index via computer. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 50:130–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14MKGP. 2008. Zakon o kmetijstvu. Available at Web site http://www.uradni-list.si/1/objava.jsp?urlid=200845&stevilka=1978 (accessed September 20, 2009).Google Scholar
15MKGP. 2004. Pravilnik o integrirani pridelavi poljščin. Available at Web site http://www.uradni-list.si/1/objava.jsp?urlid=200410&stevilka=438 (accessed February 2, 2009).Google Scholar
16MKGP. 2006. Pravilnik o ekološki pridelavi in predelavi kmetijskih pridelkov oziroma živil. Available at Web site http://www.uradni-list.si/1/objava.jsp?urlid=2006128&stevilka=5415 (accessed February 2, 2009).Google Scholar
17EC 834/2007. 2007. Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91. Available at Web site http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:189:0001:0023:EN:PDF (accessed February 2, 2009).Google Scholar
18Demeter International e.V. 2009. Production Standards for the use of Demeter, Biodynamic and related trademarks. Available at Web site http://demeter.net/standards/st_production_e09.pdf (accessed July 26, 2011).Google Scholar
19Narodoslawsky, M. and Krotscheck, C. 2004. What can we learn from ecological valuation of processes with the sustainable process index (SPI) – the case study of energy production systems. Journal of Cleaner Production 12:111–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20Hoshmand, A.R. 2006. Design of Experiments for Agriculture and the Natural Sciences. 2nd ed. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
21SURS. 2009. Statistical Yearbook 2009. Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana, 595 p. Available at Web site http://www.stat.si/letopis/ (accessed November 8, 2010).Google Scholar
22Willer, H. and Kilcher, L. (eds). 2010. The World of Organic Agriculture 2010 – Statistics and Emerging Trends. IFOAM, Bonn; FiBL, Frick.Google Scholar
23Avery, A. 2007. ‘Organic abundance’ report: fatally flawed – Commentary. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 22:321–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24Pretty, J.N., Noble, A.D., Bossio, D., Dixon, J., Hine, R.E., Penning de Vries, F.W.T., and Morison, J.I.L. 2006. Resource-conserving agriculture increases yields in developing countries. Environmental Science and Technology 40:1114–1119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25Badgley, C., Moghtader, J., Quintero, E., Zakem, E., Chappell, M.J., Avilés-Vázquez, K., Samulon, A., and Perfecto, I. 2007. Organic agriculture and the global food supply. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 22:86–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26UNPP. 2008. World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision Population Database. Available at Web site http://esa.un.org/unpp/Google Scholar
27Oslaj, M., Mursec, B. and Vindis, P. 2010. Biogas production from maize hybrids. Biomass and Bioenergy 34:1538–1545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28Hanlon, P. and McCartney, G. 2008. Peak oil: Will it be public health's greatest challenge? Public Health 122:647–652.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29Wilkinson, P. 2008. Peak oil: Threat, opportunity or phantom? Public Health 122:664–666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30Leder, F. and Shapiro, J.N. 2008. This time it's different: An inevitable decline in world petroleum production will keep oil product prices high, causing military conflicts and shifting wealth and power from democracies to authoritarian regimes. Energy Policy 36:2850–2852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Ewert, F., Rounsevell, M., Reginster, I., Metzger, M., and Leemans, R. 2005. Future scenarios of European agricultural land use: I. Estimating changes in crop productivity. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 107:101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32Wenz, F. 2010. Eco-Dyn.com Homepage. Available at Web site http://www.eco-dyn.de/ (accessed November 3, 2010).Google Scholar
33Turiel, J. 2009. Häufelpflug. Available at Web site http://www.haeufelpflug.de/cms/start.html (accessed November 3, 2010).Google Scholar
34Turinek, M., Grobelnik-Mlakar, S., Bavec, M., and Bavec, F. 2009. Biodynamic agriculture research progress and priorities. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 24:146–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35Hrustel-Majcen, M., Jurcan, S., and Vrečko, K. 2006. Akcijski načrt razvoja ekološkega kmetijstva v Sloveniji do leta 2015. Available at Web site http://www.mkgp.gov.si/fileadmin/mkgp.gov.si/pageuploads/DIR_kmet/ANEK_slo.pdf (accessed July 26, 2011).Google Scholar