IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjopen/v6y2023i2p24-360d1163224.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Assessment of the Impact of the Sugarcane Industry: An Empirical Approach with Two Focuses for San Luis Potosí, México

Author

Listed:
  • Pedro Pérez Medina

    (Multidisciplinary Graduate Program in Environmental Sciences, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, Av. Manuel Nava 201, 2o. piso, Zona Universitaria, San Luis Potosí 78210, Mexico)

  • María Guadalupe Galindo Mendoza

    (National Laboratory for Geoprocessing of Phytosanitary Information, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, Av. Sierra Leona #550-2a, Primer Piso, Lomas de San Luis, San Luis Potosí 78210, Mexico)

  • Gregorio Álvarez Fuentes

    (Desert Areas Research Institute, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, De Altaír 200, Col. del Llano, San Luis 78377, Mexico)

  • Leonardo David Tenorio Martínez

    (Faculty of Economics, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, Av. de los Pintores s/n, Burócrátas de Estado, San Luis Potosí 78213, Mexico)

  • Valter Armando Barrera López

    (Coordination for the Innovation and Application of Science and Technology, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, Av. Sierra Leona #550-2a, Lomas de San Luis, San Luis Potosí 78210, Mexico)

Abstract

The sugarcane industry has a high environmental impact. In countries such as Mexico, cultivation and harvesting practices consume and pollute many ecological resources. However, quantifying these impacts is difficult due to their diverse nature and different units of measurement. In this study, an approach with two focuses was taken to assess the environmental costs of the sugarcane industry in San Luis Potosí, México. The first focus is human health costs related to air pollution (black carbon) and the second one is a lifecycle assessment applied to the production phase. In the first case, four scenarios, with different concentrations and populations, were projected. Costs of 516.8 thousand USD were estimated for a scenario in which black carbon concentrations exceeded the WHO reference by one unit for the total population. In the second case, costs of 642 million USD were estimated for the impairment of seven ecosystem-based services. These estimates may vary due to the source and specificity of the information provided, but nevertheless are considered an appropriate approximation of the cost of environmental damage. It is recommended that first-hand information be collected and systematized to improve the certainty of the estimates and that changes to sugarcane agrifood systems be considered to reduce environmental costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Pedro Pérez Medina & María Guadalupe Galindo Mendoza & Gregorio Álvarez Fuentes & Leonardo David Tenorio Martínez & Valter Armando Barrera López, 2023. "Economic Assessment of the Impact of the Sugarcane Industry: An Empirical Approach with Two Focuses for San Luis Potosí, México," J, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-19, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjopen:v:6:y:2023:i:2:p:24-360:d:1163224
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8800/6/2/24/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8800/6/2/24/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Filoso, Solange & Carmo, Janaina Braga do & Mardegan, Sílvia Fernanda & Lins, Silvia Rafaela Machado & Gomes, Taciana Figueiredo & Martinelli, Luiz Antonio, 2015. "Reassessing the environmental impacts of sugarcane ethanol production in Brazil to help meet sustainability goals," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1847-1856.
    2. Andrew J Tanentzap & Anthony Lamb & Susan Walker & Andrew Farmer, 2015. "Resolving Conflicts between Agriculture and the Natural Environment," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ouellet, F. & Mundler, P. & Dupras, J. & Ruiz, J., 2020. "“Community developed and farmer delivered.” An analysis of the spatial and relational proximities of the Alternative Land Use Services program in Ontario," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    2. Adam Pawlewicz & Wojciech Gotkiewicz & Katarzyna Brodzińska & Katarzyna Pawlewicz & Bartosz Mickiewicz & Paweł Kluczek, 2022. "Organic Farming as an Alternative Maintenance Strategy in the Opinion of Farmers from Natura 2000 Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-22, March.
    3. Chen, Yuquan & Fan, Shenggen & Liu, Chang & Yu, Xiaohua, 2022. "Is there a tradeoff between nature reserves and grain production in China?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    4. Maurício Roberto Cherubin & João Luís Nunes Carvalho & Carlos Eduardo Pellegrino Cerri & Luiz Augusto Horta Nogueira & Glaucia Mendes Souza & Heitor Cantarella, 2021. "Land Use and Management Effects on Sustainable Sugarcane-Derived Bioenergy," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-24, January.
    5. Etter, Andrés & Andrade, Angela & Nelson, Cara R. & Cortés, Juliana & Saavedra, Kelly, 2020. "Assessing restoration priorities for high-risk ecosystems: An application of the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    6. Vincent R. Nyirenda & Bimo A. Nkhata & Oscar Tembo & Susan Siamundele, 2018. "Elephant Crop Damage: Subsistence Farmers’ Social Vulnerability, Livelihood Sustainability and Elephant Conservation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Farkas, Jenő Zsolt & Kovács, András Donát, 2021. "Nature conservation versus agriculture in the light of socio-economic changes over the last half-century–Case study from a Hungarian national park," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    8. Gábor Bakó & Zsolt Molnár & Lilla Bakk & Ferenc Horváth & Luca Fehér & Örs Ábrám & Edina Morvai & Csaba Biro & Gergely Pápay & Attila Fűrész & Károly Penksza & Diána Pácsonyi & Krisztina Demény & Erik, 2021. "Toward a High Spatial Resolution Aerial Monitoring Network for Nature Conservation—How Can Remote Sensing Help Protect Natural Areas?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-27, August.
    9. Raza Ullah & Zubair Aslam & Mansoor Maitah & Qamar uz Zaman & Safdar Bashir & Waseem Hassan & Zhongbing Chen, 2020. "Sustainable Weed Control and Enhancing Nutrient Use Efficiency in Crops through Brassica ( Brassica compestris L.) Allelopathy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-17, July.
    10. Paola Sakai & Stavros Afionis & Nicola Favretto & Lindsay C. Stringer & Caroline Ward & Marco Sakai & Pedro Henrique Weirich Neto & Carlos Hugo Rocha & Jaime Alberti Gomes & Nátali Maidl de Souza & No, 2020. "Understanding the Implications of Alternative Bioenergy Crops to Support Smallholder Farmers in Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-22, March.
    11. Nilsa Duarte da Silva Lima & Irenilza de Alencar Nääs & João Gilberto Mendes dos Reis & Raquel Baracat Tosi Rodrigues da Silva, 2020. "Classifying the Level of Energy-Environmental Efficiency Rating of Brazilian Ethanol," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-16, April.
    12. Sonja Simon & Tobias Naegler & Hans Christian Gils, 2018. "Transformation towards a Renewable Energy System in Brazil and Mexico—Technological and Structural Options for Latin America," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-26, April.
    13. Carla Inguaggiato & Michele Graziano Ceddia & Maurice Tschopp & Dimitris Christopoulos, 2021. "Collaborative Governance Networks: A Case Study of Argentina’s Forest Law," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-14, September.
    14. Wiśniewski, Łukasz & Rudnicki, Roman & Chodkowska-Miszczuk, Justyna, 2021. "What non-natural factors are behind the underuse of EU CAP funds in areas with valuable habitats?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    15. Czarnecki, Adam & Milczarek-Andrzejewska, Dominika & Widła-Domaradzki, Łukasz & Jórasz-Żak, Anna, 2023. "Conflict dynamics over farmland use in the multifunctional countryside," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    16. Klebson de Medeiros Silva, Wallysson & Neves, Talles Iwasawa & de Souza Silva, Cleiton & Carvalho, Monica & Abrahão, Raphael, 2020. "Sustainable enhancement of sugarcane fertilization for energy purposes in hot climates," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 547-552.
    17. Bell-James, Justine & Lovelock, Catherine E, 2019. "Legal barriers and enablers for reintroducing tides: An Australian case study in reconverting ponded pasture for climate change mitigation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    18. Mollie Chapman & Susanna Klassen & Maayan Kreitzman & Adrian Semmelink & Kelly Sharp & Gerald Singh & Kai M. A. Chan, 2017. "5 Key Challenges and Solutions for Governing Complex Adaptive (Food) Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-30, September.
    19. Katarzyna Brodzińska & Wojciech Gotkiewicz & Bartosz Mickiewicz & Adam Pawlewicz, 2020. "The Chosen Socio-Economic Problems of Protecting Valuable Agricultural Land in Natura 2000 Areas in Poland," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 348-366.
    20. Katarzyna Brodzinska & Wojciech Gotkiewicz & Bartosz Mickiewicz & Adam Pawlewicz, 2020. "The Chosen Socio-Economic Problems of Protecting Valuable Agricultural Land in Natura 2000 Areas in Poland," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2), pages 228-245.

    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:jjopen:v:6:y:2023:i:2:p:24-360:d:1163224. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.