IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i3p1181-d317494.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Contribution of Traditional Meat Goat Farming Systems to Human Wellbeing and Its Importance for the Sustainability of This Livestock Subsector

Author

Listed:
  • Eduardo Morales-Jerrett

    (Departamento de Ciencias Agroforestales, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agronómica, Universidad de Sevilla, 41013 Sevilla, Spain)

  • Juan Manuel Mancilla-Leytón

    (Departamento de Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Facultad de Biología, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012 Sevilla, Spain)

  • Manuel Delgado-Pertíñez

    (Departamento de Ciencias Agroforestales, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agronómica, Universidad de Sevilla, 41013 Sevilla, Spain)

  • Yolanda Mena

    (Departamento de Ciencias Agroforestales, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agronómica, Universidad de Sevilla, 41013 Sevilla, Spain)

Abstract

Traditional meat goat farming systems are characterized by rearing autochthonous breeds and using natural resources through grazing, often within protected natural areas. In a context of reduction of the number of farms, due to the low income derived from the sale of kids, the role of those systems as suppliers of presently non-remunerated ecosystem services becomes more relevant. The objective of this article is to analyze the current situation of those systems, focusing on their connection with human wellbeing, and to formulate proposals that can contribute to guaranteeing their profitability and continuity. A technical-economic and environmental study of a sample of farms and an analysis of the limiting factors affecting the subsector were carried out. As a result, a set of multifactorial problems was identified, with the lack of acknowledgement and remuneration of some services—mainly environmental and cultural—provided by those systems and the low selling price of kids standing as the main threats. The consideration of meat goat farms as “producers of meat of high functional quality and providers of ecosystem services”, which should be properly quantified and remunerated, would contribute to their preservation and guarantee the provision of benefits associated with the activity.

Suggested Citation

  • Eduardo Morales-Jerrett & Juan Manuel Mancilla-Leytón & Manuel Delgado-Pertíñez & Yolanda Mena, 2020. "The Contribution of Traditional Meat Goat Farming Systems to Human Wellbeing and Its Importance for the Sustainability of This Livestock Subsector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:1181-:d:317494
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/1181/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/1181/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baylis, Kathy & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2008. "Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 753-764, May.
    2. Jana Špulerová & František Petrovič & Peter Mederly & Matej Mojses & Zita Izakovičová, 2018. "Contribution of Traditional Farming to Ecosystem Services Provision: Case Studies from Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-24, June.
    3. Ana D. Maldonado & Darío Ramos-López & Pedro A. Aguilera, 2019. "The Role of Cultural Landscapes in the Delivery of Provisioning Ecosystem Services in Protected Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, April.
    4. Sorrell, Steve & Speirs, Jamie & Bentley, Roger & Brandt, Adam & Miller, Richard, 2010. "Global oil depletion: A review of the evidence," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5290-5295, September.
    5. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    6. David Pérez-Neira & Marta Soler-Montiel & Rosario Gutiérrez-Peña & Yolanda Mena-Guerrero, 2018. "Energy Assessment of Pastoral Dairy Goat Husbandry from an Agroecological Economics Perspective. A Case Study in Andalusia (Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, 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. Juan Manuel Mancilla-Leytón & Djamila Gribis & Claudio Pozo-Campos & Eduardo Morales-Jerrett & Yolanda Mena & Jesús Cambrollé & Ángel Martín Vicente, 2022. "Ecosystem Services Provided by Pastoral Husbandry: A Bibliometric Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-13, November.
    2. Juan Manuel Mancilla-Leytón & Rocío Fernández-Alés & Ángel Martín Vicente, 2021. "Effects of Diet Selection by Goats Grazing on the Vegetation of a Protected Pine Forest in Doñana Natural Park (SW Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-10, April.
    3. Sara Muñoz Vallés & Juan Manuel Mancilla-Leytón & Eduardo Morales-Jerrett & Yolanda Mena, 2021. "Natural Carbon Sinks Linked to Pastoral Activity in S Spain: A Territorial Evaluation Methodology for Mediterranean Goat Grazing Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-15, May.
    4. Juan Manuel Mancilla-Leytón & Carmen Hernando & Jesús Cambrollé & Sara Muñoz-Vallés & Rafael Pino-Mejías & Ángel Martín Vicente, 2021. "Can Shrub Flammability be Affected by Goat Grazing? Flammability Parameters of Mediterranean Shrub Species under Grazing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-13, February.
    5. Christina Paraskevopoulou & Alexandros Theodoridis & Marion Johnson & Athanasios Ragkos & Lisa Arguile & Laurence Smith & Dimitrios Vlachos & Georgios Arsenos, 2020. "Sustainability Assessment of Goat and Sheep Farms: A Comparison between European Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-23, April.

    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. Xu, Junming & Jiang, Jianchun & Zhao, Jiaping, 2016. "Thermochemical conversion of triglycerides for production of drop-in liquid fuels," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 331-340.
    3. Daniele, Bertolozzi-Caredio & Barbara, Soriano & Isabel, Bardaji & Alberto, Garrido, 2022. "Analysis of perceived robustness, adaptability and transformability of Spanish extensive livestock farms under alternative challenging scenarios," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    4. Ina, Porras & Bruce, Alyward & Jeff, Dengel, 2013. "Monitoring payments for watershed services schemes in developing countries," MPRA Paper 47185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Giarola, Sara & Zamboni, Andrea & Bezzo, Fabrizio, 2012. "Environmentally conscious capacity planning and technology selection for bioethanol supply chains," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 61-72.
    6. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2012. "Effective climate-energy solutions, escape routes and peak oil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 530-536.
    7. Matteo Zavalloni & Meri Raggi & Davide Viaggi, 2016. "Assessing Collective Measures in Rural Policy: The Effect of Minimum Participation Rules on the Distribution of Benefits from Irrigation Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Durrant, Rachael & Ely, Adrian, 2022. "Deliberative-analytic approaches to Ecosystem Services as a way forward for the land sparing/sharing debate," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    9. Roos M. Den Uyl & Martin J. Wassen, 2013. "A Comparative Study of Strategies for Sustainable Development of Multifunctional Fen Landscapes: Signposts to Explore New Avenues," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(6), pages 801-837, June.
    10. Kwayu, Emmanuel J. & Sallu, Susannah M. & Paavola, Jouni, 2014. "Farmer participation in the equitable payments for watershed services in Morogoro, Tanzania," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 1-9.
    11. Bernués, Alberto & Alfnes, Frode & Clemetsen, Morten & Eik, Lars Olav & Faccioni, Georgia & Ramanzin, Maurizio & Ripoll-Bosch, Raimon & Rodríguez-Ortega, Tamara & Sturaro, Enrico, 2019. "Exploring social preferences for ecosystem services of multifunctional agriculture across policy scenarios," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    12. Sattler, Claudia & Trampnau, Susanne & Schomers, Sarah & Meyer, Claas & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 31-45.
    13. Kym Anderson & Gordon Rausser & Johan Swinnen, 2013. "Political Economy of Public Policies: Insights from Distortions to Agricultural and Food Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(2), pages 423-477, June.
    14. Kuchler, Magdalena & Höök, Mikael, 2020. "Fractured visions: Anticipating (un)conventional natural gas in Poland," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    15. Sarah Schomers & Bettina Matzdorf & Claas Meyer & Claudia Sattler, 2015. "How Local Intermediaries Improve the Effectiveness of Public Payment for Ecosystem Services Programs: The Role of Networks and Agri-Environmental Assistance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-31, October.
    16. Heun, Matthew Kuperus & de Wit, Martin, 2012. "Energy return on (energy) invested (EROI), oil prices, and energy transitions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 147-158.
    17. Stine Broch & Suzanne Vedel, 2012. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 561-581, April.
    18. Helin, Janne, 2008. "Environmental protection of agriculture -clash of policies?," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6468, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Matthew C. LaFevor & Alexandra G. Ponette-González & Rebecca Larson & Leah M. Mungai, 2021. "Spatial Targeting of Agricultural Support Measures: Indicator-Based Assessment of Coverages and Leakages," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    20. Rachael D. Garrett & Meredith Niles & Juliana Gil & Philip Dy & Julio Reis & Judson Valentim, 2017. "Policies for Reintegrating Crop and Livestock Systems: A Comparative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-22, March.

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:1181-:d:317494. 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.