IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v149y2016icp20-29.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Productive performance of alternative land covers along aridity gradients: Ecological, agronomic and economic perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Murray, Francisco
  • Baldi, Germán
  • von Bernard, Tamara
  • Viglizzo, Ernesto Francisco
  • Jobbágy, Esteban Gabriel

Abstract

The replacement of natural vegetation by pastures and extensive crops is generally driven by economic incentives and supported by technology improvements and multiple subsidies. However, towards areas of increasing aridity the productive performance of these replacements may decline from all perspectives – ecological to agronomic to economic – due to intrinsic differences in the structural and physiological adjustment of natural and cultivated vegetation to reduced and fluctuating water availability. We compare natural woody vegetation, perennial C4 pastures and annual crops (maize, soybean and wheat) along a gradient of decreasing precipitation (900–400mm of annual mean) encompassing the current agricultural frontier of the Dry Chaco and Western Espinal ecoregions of South America. We assess (i) aboveground net primary productivity (ANPP) (ii) yields of product dry mass, edible energy and protein outputs and, (iii) economic gross profits and return of investment. We linked climatic with yield data from national statistics, field trials and empiric models, together with productive parameters and market prices obtained from local consultants and economic bulletins. Maize achieved the highest ANPP of all vegetation covers (+42% in average compared to the rest) along the entire precipitation gradient, while the rest of the crops were very similar to natural vegetation. Pastures approached the ANPP of natural vegetation in the humid range, but had the lowest performance below 700mm (−15%). Along the entire precipitation gradient, maize was outstanding in mass and edible energy yield while soybean was so in protein production. Soybean had the highest gross profit per hectare (+50%) and total capital return of investment (+70%). Pastures offered the highest functional capital return of investment (+98%; without fixed capital, infrastructure and land value costs), explaining their relevance at the onset of the deforestation process and the gradual prevalence of crops afterwards. While agronomic and economic incentives for natural vegetation replacement remain strong along the whole aridity gradient, crop choice rather than land use system seem to shape the key ecological process of net primary productivity.

Suggested Citation

  • Murray, Francisco & Baldi, Germán & von Bernard, Tamara & Viglizzo, Ernesto Francisco & Jobbágy, Esteban Gabriel, 2016. "Productive performance of alternative land covers along aridity gradients: Ecological, agronomic and economic perspectives," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 20-29.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:149:y:2016:i:c:p:20-29
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2016.08.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X16303833
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.08.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pfaff, Alexander S. P., 1999. "What Drives Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon?: Evidence from Satellite and Socioeconomic Data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 26-43, January.
    2. Sadras, Victor & Roget, David & Krause, Mike, 2003. "Dynamic cropping strategies for risk management in dry-land farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 929-948, June.
    3. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    4. Matin Qaim & Greg Traxler, 2005. "Roundup Ready soybeans in Argentina: farm level and aggregate welfare effects," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 73-86, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Baldassini, Pablo & Paruelo, José María, 2020. "Deforestation and current management practices reduce soil organic carbon in the semi-arid Chaco, Argentina," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    2. Aguiar, Sebastián & Mastrángelo, Matías E. & Texeira, Marcos & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Volante, José N. & Paruelo, José M., 2022. "Roads and land tenure mediate the effects of precipitation on forest cover change in the Argentine Dry Chaco," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Law, Elizabeth A. & Macchi, Leandro & Baumann, Matthias & Decarre, Julieta & Gavier-Pizarro, Gregorio & Levers, Christian & Mastrangelo, Matías E. & Murray, Francisco & Müller, Daniel & Piquer-Rodrígu, 2021. "Fading opportunities for mitigating agriculture-environment trade-offs in a south American deforestation hotspot," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 262.
    4. Piquer-Rodríguez, M. & Baumann, M. & Butsic, V. & Gasparri, H.I. & Gavier-Pizarro, G. & Volante, J.N. & Müller, D. & Kuemmerle, T., 2018. "The potential impact of economic policies on future land-use conversions in Argentina," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 57-67.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Coria, Jessica & Robinson, Elizabeth & Smith, Henrik G. & Sterner, Thomas, 2012. "Biodiversity Conservation and Ecosystem Services Provision: Tale of Confused Objectives, Multiple Market Failures and Policy Challenges," Working Papers in Economics 546, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    2. Araujo, Claudio & Bonjean, Catherine Araujo & Combes, Jean-Louis & Combes Motel, Pascale & Reis, Eustaquio J., 2009. "Property rights and deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2461-2468, June.
    3. Heng, Dora, 2015. "Incentives, Institutions and Investment in Private Agricultural Reasearch in Asia," SS-AAEA Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 2015, pages 1-25.
    4. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Sébastien Marchand, 2011. "Technical Efficiency, Farm Size and Tropical Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazonian Forest," CERDI Working papers halshs-00552981, HAL.
    6. Daniela D’Alessandro & Andrea Rebecchi & Letizia Appolloni & Andrea Brambilla & Silvio Brusaferro & Maddalena Buffoli & Maurizio Carta & Alessandra Casuccio & Liliana Coppola & Maria Vittoria Corazza , 2023. "Re-Thinking the Environment, Cities, and Living Spaces for Public Health Purposes, According with the COVID-19 Lesson: The LVII Erice Charter," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-17, September.
    7. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Lina O Anderson & Samantha De Martino & Torfinn Harding & Karlygash Kuralbayeva & Andre Lima, 2016. "The Effects of Land Use Regulation on Deforestation:," OxCarre Working Papers 172, Oxford Centre for the Analysis of Resource Rich Economies, University of Oxford.
    9. Ze Han & Wei Song & Xiangzheng Deng, 2016. "Responses of Ecosystem Service to Land Use Change in Qinghai Province," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, April.
    10. Sydorovych, Olha & Marra, Michele C., 2007. "A Genetically Engineered Crop's Impact on Pesticide Use: A Revealed-Preference Index Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 32(3), pages 1-16, December.
    11. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    12. Sims, Katharine R.E., 2010. "Conservation and development: Evidence from Thai protected areas," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 94-114, September.
    13. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    14. David López-Carr, 2021. "A Review of Small Farmer Land Use and Deforestation in Tropical Forest Frontiers: Implications for Conservation and Sustainable Livelihoods," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-23, October.
    15. Hooper, Tara & Cooper, Philip & Hunt, Alistair & Austen, Melanie, 2014. "A methodology for the assessment of local-scale changes in marine environmental benefits and its application," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 65-74.
    16. Graham Brookes & Tun-Hsiang (Edward) Yu & Simla Tokgoz & Amani Elobeid, 2010. "Production and Price Impact of Biotech Crops, The," Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications (archive only) 10-wp503, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    17. Phélinas, Pascale & Choumert, Johanna, 2017. "Is GM Soybean Cultivation in Argentina Sustainable?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 452-462.
    18. Casey, James F. & Caviglia-Harris, Jill L., 2000. "Deforestation And Agroforestry Adoption In Tropical Forests: Can We Generalize? Some Results From Campeche, Mexico And Rondonia, Brazil," 2000 Annual Meeting, June 29-July 1, 2000, Vancouver, British Columbia 36466, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    19. H. Spencer Banzhaf & James Boyd, 2012. "The Architecture and Measurement of an Ecosystem Services Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-32, March.
    20. Wang, Shifeng & Wang, Sicong & Smith, Pete, 2015. "Quantifying impacts of onshore wind farms on ecosystem services at local and global scales," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1424-1428.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:149:y:2016:i:c:p:20-29. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.