IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i2p211-d502530.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Production of Pastoral Space: Modeling Spatial Occupation of Grazing Land for Environmental Impact Assessment Using Structural Equation Modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Bayarmaa Byambaa

    (Chair of Land Management, Department of Aerospace and Geodesy, Technical University of Munich, 80333 Munich, Germany)

  • Walter T. de Vries

    (Chair of Land Management, Department of Aerospace and Geodesy, Technical University of Munich, 80333 Munich, Germany)

Abstract

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a key tool for both environmental and land management. It identifies potential adverse and unintended consequences of the projects on land use and the environment and derives possible mitigation measures to address these impacts. Calculating the volume and severity of impacts is complex and often relies on selections and simplifications. Moreover, calculating impacts associated with nomadic-pastoral (dynamic) land use is still an unresolved methodological problem. A full understanding of the patterns of dynamic land use in nomadic pastoralism is still lacking. Consequently, EIAs are currently able to predict the negative impacts associated with dynamic land use insufficiently. This article addresses this lacuna by modeling the spatial occupation of grazing land using a statistical modeling technique of structural equation modeling (SEM) and the R package lavaan for SEM, in order to explain the behavior of dynamic land use for EIA. Based on the concepts of the production of space and pastoral spatiality, we specified and tested a model of spatial occupation of grazing areas hypothesizing interrelationships between factors influencing the pastoral space using empirical data from two different ecological zones in Mongolia. The findings suggest that grazing areas, herd mobility, and herd size and composition have direct positive effects on each other. Compared to broad-scale pastoral movements, the herd size and composition significantly affect the size of grazing areas and the extent of fine-scale herding mobility. Herders occupy more pastoral space and increase their daily herding movements at their campsites when the population of livestock increases. By contrast, the herd size and composition do not considerably affect the herders’ decision to migrate for extensive grazing between their seasonal campsites. Likewise, the scale of grazing areas and fine-scale pastoral mobility do not affect significantly the broad-scale herding mobility between campsites. The broad-scale herding mobility is relatively independent of the fine-scale mobility; however, they covary. This is the first study to analyze and quantify the effects of grazing areas, herding mobility, and herd size and composition in the same study. EIA impact prediction should consider grazing areas as a dynamic space that is influenced by grazing orbits, fine and broad-scale herding movements including otor , livestock species, the number of animals as well as households at campsites.

Suggested Citation

  • Bayarmaa Byambaa & Walter T. de Vries, 2021. "The Production of Pastoral Space: Modeling Spatial Occupation of Grazing Land for Environmental Impact Assessment Using Structural Equation Modeling," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-18, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:2:p:211-:d:502530
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/2/211/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/2/211/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ningchuan Xiao & Shanshan Cai & Mark Moritz & Rebecca Garabed & Laura W Pomeroy, 2015. "Spatial and Temporal Characteristics of Pastoral Mobility in the Far North Region, Cameroon: Data Analysis and Modeling," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-30, July.
    2. Xu, Yecheng & Zhang, Yaoqi & Chen, Jiquan & John, Ranjeet, 2019. "Livestock dynamics under changing economy and climate in Mongolia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    3. Chuan Liao, 2018. "Modeling Herding Decision Making in the Extensive Grazing System in Southern Ethiopia," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 108(1), pages 260-276, January.
    4. Senda, Trinity S. & Robinson, Lance W. & Gachene, Charles K.K. & Kironchi, Geoffrey & Doyo, Jaldesa, 2020. "An assessment of the implications of alternative scales of communal land tenure formalization in pastoral systems," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    5. Kuemmerle, Tobias & Erb, Karlheinz & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Müller, Daniel & Verburg, Peter H & Estel, Stephan & Haberl, Helmut & Hostert, Patrick & Jepsen, Martin R. & Kastner, Thomas & Levers, Christi, 2013. "Challenges and opportunities in mapping land use intensity globally," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 5(5), pages 484-493.
    6. Guo, Shan & Jiang, Li & Shen, Geoffrey Q.P., 2019. "Embodied pasture land use change in China 2000-2015: From the perspective of globalization," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 476-485.
    7. Batunacun, & Wieland, Ralf & Lakes, Tobia & Yunfeng, Hu & Nendel, Claas, 2019. "Identifying drivers of land degradation in Xilingol, China, between 1975 and 2015," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 543-559.
    8. Tsang, Eric W. K., 2014. "Old and New," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(03), pages 390-390, November.
    9. Nathan F. Sayre & Diana K. Davis & Brandon Bestelmeyer & Jeb C. Williamson, 2017. "Rangelands: Where Anthromes Meet Their Limits," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-11, May.
    10. Rosseel, Yves, 2012. "lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i02).
    11. Erb, Karl-Heinz & Haberl, Helmut & Jepsen, Martin Rudbeck & Kuemmerle, Tobias & Lindner, Marcus & Müller, Daniel & Verburg, Peter H & Reenberg, Anette, 2013. "A conceptual framework for analysing and measuring land-use intensity," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 5(5), pages 464-470.
    12. Korbinian P. Freier & Manfred Finckh & Uwe A. Schneider, 2014. "Adaptation to New Climate by an Old Strategy? Modeling Sedentary and Mobile Pastoralism in Semi-Arid Morocco," Land, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-24, July.
    13. Liu, Min & Dries, Liesbeth & Huang, Jikun & Min, Shi & Tang, Jianjun, 2019. "The impacts of the eco-environmental policy on grassland degradation and livestock production in Inner Mongolia, China: An empirical analysis based on the simultaneous equation model," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    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. Stephanie D. Maier & Jan Paul Lindner & Javier Francisco, 2019. "Conceptual Framework for Biodiversity Assessments in Global Value Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-34, March.
    2. Song, Min & Yi, Luping & Hu, Can, 2023. "Building up a compensation-oriented transferable development right mechanism: A theoretical and empirical exploration in Hubei, China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    3. Mbanze, Aires Afonso & Viera da Silva, Carina & Ribeiro, Natasha Sofia & Silva, João F. & Santos, José Lima, 2020. "A Livelihood and Farming System approach for effective conservation policies in Protected Areas of Developing Countries: The case study of the Niassa National Reserve in Mozambique," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    4. Niedertscheider, Maria & Kuemmerle, Tobias & Müller, Daniel & Erb, Karl-Heinz, 2014. "Exploring the effects of drastic institutional and socio-economic changes on land system dynamics in Germany between 1883 and 2007," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 28, pages 98-108.
    5. Jänicke, Clemens & Goddard, Adam & Stein, Susanne & Steinmann, Horst-Henning & Lakes, Tobia & Nendel, Claas & Müller, Daniel, 2022. "Field-level land-use data reveal heterogeneous crop sequences with distinct regional differences in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 141, pages 1-12.
    6. Piotr Koc, 2021. "Measuring Non-electoral Political Participation: Bi-factor Model as a Tool to Extract Dimensions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 271-287, July.
    7. Yu, Qiangyi & Xiang, Mingtao & Sun, Zhanli & Wu, Wenbin, 2021. "The complexity of measuring cropland use intensity: An empirical study," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 192.
    8. Pratzer, Marie & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Antongiovanni, Marina & Aragon, Roxana & Baldi, Germán & Czaplicki Cabezas, Stasiek & de la Vega-Leinert, Cristina A. & Dhyani, Shalini & Diepart, Jean-Christophe, 2024. "An actor-centered, scalable land system typology for addressing biodiversity loss in the world’s tropical dry woodlands," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 86, pages 1-14.
    9. Žiga Malek & Peter H. Verburg, 2018. "Adaptation of land management in the Mediterranean under scenarios of irrigation water use and availability," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 821-837, August.
    10. Roux, Nicolas & Kastner, Thomas & Erb, Karl-Heinz & Haberl, Helmut, 2021. "Does agricultural trade reduce pressure on land ecosystems? Decomposing drivers of the embodied human appropriation of net primary production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    11. Wu, Wenbin & You, Liangzhi & Chen, Kevin Z., 2015. "Cropping intensity gaps: The potential for expanded global harvest areas," IFPRI discussion papers 1459, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    12. Richard Aspinall & Michele Staiano & Diane Pearson, 2021. "Emergent Properties of Land Systems: Nonlinear Dynamics of Scottish Farming Systems from 1867 to 2020," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-27, November.
    13. Meiyappan, Prasanth & Dalton, Michael & O’Neill, Brian C. & Jain, Atul K., 2014. "Spatial modeling of agricultural land use change at global scale," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 291(C), pages 152-174.
    14. Ye, Sijing & Song, Changqing & Shen, Shi & Gao, Peichao & Cheng, Changxiu & Cheng, Feng & Wan, Changjun & Zhu, Dehai, 2020. "Spatial pattern of arable land-use intensity in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    15. Ali Shalizar Jalali, 2018. "Male Fertility as a Bull’s Eye for Mastocytosis," Global Journal of Reproductive Medicine, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 3(3), pages 58-60, February.
    16. Md. Mominur Rahman & Bilkis Akhter, 2021. "The impact of investment in human capital on bank performance: evidence from Bangladesh," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-13, December.
    17. Ada P. Smith & Sechindra Vallury & Elizabeth Covelli Metcalf, 2023. "Social dimensions of adaptation to climate change in rangelands: a systematic literature review," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(12), pages 1-24, December.
    18. César Merino-Soto & Gina Chávez-Ventura & Verónica López-Fernández & Guillermo M. Chans & Filiberto Toledano-Toledano, 2022. "Learning Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-L): Psychometric and Measurement Invariance Evidence in Peruvian Undergraduate Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-17, September.
    19. Nikolov, Plamen & Adelman, Alan, 2019. "Do private household transfers to the elderly respond to public pension benefits? Evidence from rural China," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).
    20. Dana Benešová & Viera Kubičková & Miroslava Prváková, 2020. "Open innovation model in the knowledge intensive business services in the Slovak Republic," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 8(2), pages 1340-1358, December.

    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:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:2:p:211-:d:502530. 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.