IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v3y2013i2p271-284d25254.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reduction in Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with Worm Control in Lambs

Author

Listed:
  • Fiona Kenyon

    () (Moredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Bush Loan, Penicuik, EH26 0PZ, Scotland, UK)

  • Jan M. Dick

    () (SEE360, Bush House, Edinburgh Technopole, Penicuik, Midlothian, EH26 0BB Scotland, UK)

  • Ron I. Smith

    () (SEE360, Bush House, Edinburgh Technopole, Penicuik, Midlothian, EH26 0BB Scotland, UK)

  • Drew G. Coulter

    () (SEE360, Bush House, Edinburgh Technopole, Penicuik, Midlothian, EH26 0BB Scotland, UK)

  • David McBean

    () (Moredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Bush Loan, Penicuik, EH26 0PZ, Scotland, UK)

  • Philip J. Skuce

    () (Moredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Bush Loan, Penicuik, EH26 0PZ, Scotland, UK)

Abstract

There are currently little or no data on the role of endemic disease control in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from livestock. In the present study, we have used an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)-compliant model to calculate GHG emissions from naturally grazing lambs under four different anthelmintic drug treatment regimes over a 5-year study period. Treatments were either “monthly” (NST), “strategic” (SPT), “targeted” (TST) or based on “clinical signs” (MT). Commercial sheep farming practices were simulated, with lambs reaching a pre-selected target market weight (38 kg) removed from the analysis as they would no longer contribute to the GHG budget of the flock. Results showed there was a significant treatment effect over all years, with lambs in the MT group consistently taking longer to reach market weight, and an extra 10% emission of CO 2 e per kg of weight gain over the other treatments. There were no significant differences between the other three treatment strategies (NST, SPT and TST) in terms of production efficiency or cumulated GHG emissions over the experimental period. This study has shown that endemic disease control can contribute to a reduction in GHG emissions from animal agriculture and help reduce the carbon footprint of livestock farming.

Suggested Citation

  • Fiona Kenyon & Jan M. Dick & Ron I. Smith & Drew G. Coulter & David McBean & Philip J. Skuce, 2013. "Reduction in Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with Worm Control in Lambs," Agriculture, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 3(2), pages 1-14, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:3:y:2013:i:2:p:271-284:d:25254
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/3/2/271/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/3/2/271/
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laurian J. Unnevehr & Helen H. Jensen, 1996. "HACCP as a Regulatory Innovation to Improve Food Safety in the Meat Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(3), pages 764-769.
    2. Mitchell, Lorraine, 2004. "Food Safety and International Trade: Theoretical Issues," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33599, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. Smith, Richard D., 2006. "Responding to global infectious disease outbreaks: Lessons from SARS on the role of risk perception, communication and management," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(12), pages 3113-3123, December.
    4. Ilvento, Thomas W., 1997. "Expanding The Role And Function Of The Cooperative Extension System In The University Setting," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 26(2), October.
    5. Ilvento, Thomas W., 1997. "Expanding the Role and Function of the Cooperative Extension System in the University Setting," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(02), pages 153-165, October.
    6. Wim Verbeke, 2005. "Agriculture and the food industry in the information age," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 32(3), pages 347-368, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    greenhouse gas emissions; sustainable parasite control; targeted selective treatment; carbon footprint; livestock ; anthelmintic;

    JEL classification:

    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General
    • Q11 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Aggregate Supply and Demand Analysis; Prices
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • Q14 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Finance
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy

    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:gam:jagris:v:3:y:2013:i:2:p:271-284:d:25254. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (XML Conversion Team). General contact details of provider: http://www.mdpi.com/ .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.