IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i4p1715-d494094.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Learning Resilience in Local Livestock Breeds from COVID-19 Pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Federica Turri

    (Institute of Agricultural Biology and Biotechnology, National Research Council, Via Einstein, 26900 Lodi, Italy)

  • Flavia Pizzi

    (Institute of Agricultural Biology and Biotechnology, National Research Council, Via Einstein, 26900 Lodi, Italy)

  • Gustavo Gandini

    (Institute of Agricultural Biology and Biotechnology, National Research Council, Via Einstein, 26900 Lodi, Italy
    Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Milan, Via dell’Universita’ 6, 26900 Lodi, Italy)

Abstract

In situ conservation of local breeds requires populations in economically sustainable and resilient production systems. In those countries where the market recognizes the quality of the products of local breeds, the traditional relationship between local breeds and products can be used to improve breed profitability. We analyze sales data from year 2020 of five dairy products associated with endangered local breeds farmed in northern Italy, in order to understand the potential resilience of these production systems, in terms of ability to persist and to adapt to disturbances associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. All breed-cheese systems showed good capacity to persist during the COVID-19 pandemic, with four systems even increasing sales with respect to the period 2017–2019. Three breed-cheese systems showed rapid adaptation to the new conditions by modifying sales channels, including the introduction of e-commerce.

Suggested Citation

  • Federica Turri & Flavia Pizzi & Gustavo Gandini, 2021. "Learning Resilience in Local Livestock Breeds from COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-6, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:1715-:d:494094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/1715/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/1715/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Narloch, Ulf & Drucker, Adam G. & Pascual, Unai, 2011. "Payments for agrobiodiversity conservation services for sustained on-farm utilization of plant and animal genetic resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1837-1845, 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. Johannes Kotschi & Bernd Horneburg, 2018. "The Open Source Seed Licence: A novel approach to safeguarding access to plant germplasm," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-7, October.
    2. Lucia Rocchi & Antonio Boggia & Luisa Paolotti, 2020. "Sustainable Agricultural Systems: A Bibliometrics Analysis of Ecological Modernization Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-16, November.
    3. Elisabetta Gotor & Carlo Orecchia & Giacomo Pallante & Carlo Fadda & Luca Salvatici, 2025. "Agrobiodiversity Conservation Policies: Insights from an Integrated Micro-macro Economic Model in Ethiopia," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 42(1), pages 91-119, April.
    4. Mauricio R. Bellon & Alicia Mastretta-Yanes & Alejandro Ponce-Mendoza & Daniel Ortiz-Santa María & Oswaldo Oliveros-Galindo & Hugo Perales & Francisca Acevedo & José Sarukhán, 2021. "Beyond subsistence: the aggregate contribution of campesinos to the supply and conservation of native maize across Mexico," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(1), pages 39-53, February.
    5. Elsa Varela & Zein Kallas, 2022. "Societal preferences for the conservation of traditional pig breeds and their agroecosystems: Addressing preference heterogeneity and protest responses through deterministic allocation and scale‐exten," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 761-788, September.
    6. Isbell, Carina & Tobin, Daniel & Reynolds, Travis, 2021. "Motivations for maintaining crop diversity: Evidence from Vermont's seed systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    7. Wenjuan Cheng & Alessio D’Amato & Giacomo Pallante, 2020. "Benefit sharing mechanisms for agricultural genetic diversity use and on-farm conservation," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 37(1), pages 337-355, April.
    8. Samuel, Aurelia F. & Drucker, Adam G. & Andersen, Sven B. & Simianer, Henner & van Zonneveld, Maarten, 2013. "Development of a cost-effective diversity-maximising decision-support tool for in situ crop genetic resources conservation: The case of cacao," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 155-164.
    9. Zander, Kerstin K. & Signorello, Giovanni & De Salvo, Maria & Gandini, Gustavo & Drucker, Adam G., 2013. "Assessing the total economic value of threatened livestock breeds in Italy: Implications for conservation policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 219-229.
    10. Alessio Ilari & Sara Fabrizi & Ester Foppa Pedretti, 2022. "European Hophornbeam Biomass for Energy Application: Influence of Different Production Processes and Heating Devices on Environmental Sustainability," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-15, January.
    11. Raghu, Prabhakaran T. & Das, Sukanya & Ravi, S. Bala & King, E.D. Israel Oliver, 2012. "Use of Contingent Valuation to Assess Farmer Preference for On-farm Conservation of Minor Millets: Case from South India," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 67(3), pages 1-14.
    12. Varela, Elsa & Kallas, Zein, 2022. "Extensive Mediterranean agroecosystems and their linked traditional breeds: Societal demand for the conservation of the Majorcan black pig," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    13. Jaqueline Garcia-Yi, 2014. "Market-Based Instruments for the Conservation of Underutilized Crops: In-Store Experimental Auction of Native Chili Products in Bolivia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-19, November.
    14. F. Fagandini Ruiz & D. Bazile & A. G. Drucker & M. Tapia & E. Chura, 2021. "Geographical distribution of quinoa crop wild relatives in the Peruvian Andes: a participatory mapping initiative," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 6337-6358, April.
    15. Coromaldi, Manuela & Pallante, Giacomo & Savastano, Sara, 2015. "Adoption of modern varieties, farmers' welfare and crop biodiversity: Evidence from Uganda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 346-358.
    16. Menger, Anna Katharina & Hamm, Ulrich, 2021. "Consumers' knowledge and perceptions of endangered livestock breeds: How wording influences conservation efforts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    17. Giacomo Pallante & Adam Drucker, 2014. "Niche Markets for Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Preference and Scale Heterogeneity Effects on Nepalese Consumers’ WTP for Finger Millet Products," SEEDS Working Papers 1414, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised May 2014.
    18. Johannes Kotschi & Berthold Schrimpf & Ann Waters-Bayer & Bernd Horneburg, 2022. "Financing Organic Plant Breeding—New Economic Models for Seed as a Commons," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-14, August.
    19. Zhidong Li & Boru Su & Moucheng Liu, 2022. "Research Progress on the Theory and Practice of Grassland Eco-Compensation in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    20. Midler, Estelle & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G. & Narloch, Ulf & Soto, José Luis, 2015. "Unraveling the effects of payments for ecosystem services on motivations for collective action," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 394-405.

    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:13:y:2021:i:4:p:1715-:d:494094. 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.