IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v46y2020ics2212041620301376.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental pressure of the European agricultural system: Anticipating the biophysical consequences of internalization

Author

Listed:
  • Renner, Ansel
  • Cadillo-Benalcazar, Juan José
  • Benini, Lorenzo
  • Giampietro, Mario

Abstract

In the European Union, national-scope efforts to protect local ecosystem services are greatly helped by the externalization of agricultural production. Domestic environmental pressures such as pesticide residue, fertilizer leakage and waterbody overdraft would all significantly increase if European agricultural production were to be re-localized. Those increases would add additional stress on local habitats, soils and freshwater reserves. This work addresses such concerns by anticipating pressure increases associated with a near-complete re-internalization of agricultural production in the European Union. Our results could prove relevant in the event of an end of the era of cheap food imports, or when considering the plausibility of economic circularization efforts (such as suggested by the European Green Deal). Rather than produce quantitative results determined by a given set of supposedly uncontested pre-analytical assumptions, this work presents an innovative approach to scientific representation capable of accommodating several possible results driven by contradictory yet equally legitimate insights. According to our characterization of the option space, which builds on current trade profiles and assumes business as usual change in technical coefficients, a near-complete re-internalization of agricultural production by European Union member states is not environmentally feasible. In relation to social viability, the required changes in social practices would include a significant increase in the share of agricultural workers in the economy and important dietary adjustments.

Suggested Citation

  • Renner, Ansel & Cadillo-Benalcazar, Juan José & Benini, Lorenzo & Giampietro, Mario, 2020. "Environmental pressure of the European agricultural system: Anticipating the biophysical consequences of internalization," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:46:y:2020:i:c:s2212041620301376
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101195
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041620301376
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101195?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jens Beckert, 2013. "Capitalism as a System of Expectations," Politics & Society, , vol. 41(3), pages 323-350, September.
    2. Leontief, Wassily, 1970. "Environmental Repercussions and the Economic Structure: An Input-Output Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 52(3), pages 262-271, August.
    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. Keith B. Matthews & Ansel Renner & Kirsty L. Blackstock & Kerry A. Waylen & Dave G. Miller & Doug H. Wardell-Johnson & Alba Juarez-Bourke & Juan Cadillo-Benalcazar & Joep F. Schyns & Mario Giampietro, 2021. "Old Wine in New Bottles: Exploiting Data from the EU’s Farm Accountancy Data Network for Pan-EU Sustainability Assessments of Agricultural Production Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-26, September.
    2. Pérez-Sánchez, Laura & Velasco-Fernández, Raúl & Giampietro, Mario, 2021. "The international division of labor and embodied working time in trade for the US, the EU and China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    3. Mario Giampietro, 2024. "From input–output analysis to the quantification of metabolic patterns: David Pimentel’s contribution to the analysis of complex environmental problems," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(12), pages 29911-29932, December.
    4. Connor, Jeffery D. & Summers, David & Regan, Courtney & Abbott, Hayley & Van Der Linden, Leon & Frizenschaf, Jacqueline, 2022. "Sensitivity analysis in economic evaluation of payments for water and carbon ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    5. To Trung Thanh & Le Thanh Ha & Hoang Phuong Dung & Tran Thi Lan Huong, 2023. "Impacts of digitalization on energy security: evidence from European countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(10), pages 11599-11644, October.
    6. Fritz Wittmann & Michael Eder, 2023. "Farmers facing changed urban dietary patterns: whether and what to adapt?," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(7), pages 1-26, October.
    7. Manfroni, Michele & Velasco-Fernández, Raúl & Pérez-Sánchez, Laura & Bukkens, Sandra G.F. & Giampietro, Mario, 2021. "The profile of time allocation in the metabolic pattern of society: An internal biophysical limit to economic growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).

    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. Taelim Choi & Randall W. Jackson & Nancey Green Leigh & Christa D. Jensen, 2011. "A Baseline Input—Output Model with Environmental Accounts (IOEA) Applied to E-Waste Recycling," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 34(1), pages 3-33, January.
    2. Daniel Moran & Richard Wood, 2014. "Convergence Between The Eora, Wiod, Exiobase, And Openeu'S Consumption-Based Carbon Accounts," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 245-261, September.
    3. Arik Levinson, 2009. "Technology, International Trade, and Pollution from US Manufacturing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2177-2192, December.
    4. Li, Yilin & Chen, Bin & Li, Chaohui & Li, Zhi & Chen, Guoqian, 2020. "Energy perspective of Sino-US trade imbalance in global supply chains," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    5. Zhu, Bangzhu & Su, Bin & Li, Yingzhu & Ng, Tsan Sheng, 2020. "Embodied energy and intensity in China’s (normal and processing) exports and their driving forces, 2005-2015," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    6. Kumar, Indraneel & Tyner, Wallace E. & Sinha, Kumares C., 2016. "Input–output life cycle environmental assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from utility scale wind energy in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 294-301.
    7. Yannic Rehm & Lucas Chancel, 2022. "Measuring the Carbon Content of Wealth Evidence from France and Germany," PSE Working Papers halshs-03828939, HAL.
    8. Daniel Croner & Ivan Frankovic, 2018. "A Structural Decomposition Analysis of Global and NationalEnergy Intensity Trends," The Energy Journal, , vol. 39(2), pages 103-122, March.
    9. Stern, David I., 1997. "Limits to substitution and irreversibility in production and consumption: A neoclassical interpretation of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 197-215, June.
    10. Minihan, Erin S. & Wu, Ziping, 2011. "The Potential Economic and Environmental Costs of GHG Mitigation Measures for Cattle Sectors in Northern Ireland," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108779, Agricultural Economics Society.
    11. Bruckner, Martin & Giljum, Stefan & Fischer, Günther & Tramberend, Sylvia & Börner, Jan, 2018. "The global cropland footprint of the non-food bioeconomy," Discussion Papers 271062, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    12. Eivind Lekve Bjelle & Johannes Többen & Konstantin Stadler & Thomas Kastner & Michaela C. Theurl & Karl-Heinz Erb & Kjartan-Steen Olsen & Kirsten S. Wiebe & Richard Wood, 2020. "Adding country resolution to EXIOBASE: impacts on land use embodied in trade," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 9(1), pages 1-25, December.
    13. Suh, Sangwon, 2004. "Functions, commodities and environmental impacts in an ecological-economic model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 451-467, April.
    14. Lixiao Zhang & Qiuhong Hu & Fan Zhang, 2014. "Input-Output Modeling for Urban Energy Consumption in Beijing: Dynamics and Comparison," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-11, March.
    15. Robert Ayres, 1995. "Thermodynamics and process analysis for future economic scenarios," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(3), pages 207-230, October.
    16. Roca, Jordi & Serrano, Monica, 2007. "Income growth and atmospheric pollution in Spain: An input-output approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 230-242, June.
    17. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2010. "Input-output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: The effects of spatial aggregation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 10-18, November.
    18. Nakamura, Shinichiro, 1999. "An interindustry approach to analyzing economic and environmental effects of the recycling of waste," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 133-145, January.
    19. Knut Heen & Magnar Andersen, 1994. "Regional economic impact of oil spills," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(3), pages 265-277, June.
    20. Freire-González, Jaume, 2017. "Evidence of direct and indirect rebound effect in households in EU-27 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 270-276.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ecoser:v:46:y:2020:i:c:s2212041620301376. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.