IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i14p8230-d856556.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Study on the Relationship between Low-Carbon Circular Farming and Animal Husbandry Models and Human Well-Being: A Case Study of Yongchang County, Gansu Province

Author

Listed:
  • Ying Zhang

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources Science and Technology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Xiaobin Dong

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources Science and Technology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Xue-Chao Wang

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources Science and Technology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Mengxue Liu

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources Science and Technology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Peng Zhang

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources Science and Technology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Ranran Liu

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources Science and Technology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Jiuming Huang

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources Science and Technology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Shuheng Dong

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources Science and Technology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

Abstract

The detrimental effects of climate change require countries and regions to use green and low-carbon strategies as the basis for economic development. Agriculture and livestock industry have become among the main industries that emit greenhouse gases. Yongchang County is suitable for the development of large-scale livestock operations due to its unique geographical advantages. However, the potential effects of the carbon dioxide emissions and the environmental impact potential of various farming and animal husbandry farming models on human well-being need to be considered. The purpose of this paper is to use life cycle assessment (LCA) to comprehensively assess the carbon emissions and environmental impact of circular agriculture and livestock industry and to provide important decision support for the establishment of a low-carbon circular agriculture and animal husbandry model. It uses a 75 kg dairy sheep as a functional unit to combine a noncircular farming model (S1) and a circular farming model (S2). The degree of carbon emissions, environmental impact potential and human well-being environmental effects are compared. The results show that the carbon dioxide emission of S1 is 891.3 kg, while the emission of S2 is 647.3 kg, and the difference between the two is 244 kg. S2 has a lower global warming potential than the S1 model; hence, the S2 model, which uses biogas for power, has lower carbon emission than the S1 model. From the perspective of human well-being and environmental benefits, the S2 model of biogas power generation is a low carbon emission and high-benefit model. The biogas power generation model lays the foundation for the realization of the “peak carbon dioxide emissions” and “carbon neutralization” goal, strengthens ecological protection on the north side of the Qilian Mountains and improves human well-being in the region.

Suggested Citation

  • Ying Zhang & Xiaobin Dong & Xue-Chao Wang & Mengxue Liu & Peng Zhang & Ranran Liu & Jiuming Huang & Shuheng Dong, 2022. "Study on the Relationship between Low-Carbon Circular Farming and Animal Husbandry Models and Human Well-Being: A Case Study of Yongchang County, Gansu Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8230-:d:856556
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8230/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8230/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weiguo Fan & Peng Zhang & Zihan Xu & Hejie Wei & Nachuan Lu & Xuechao Wang & Boqi Weng & Zhongdian Chen & Feilong Wu & Xiaobin Dong, 2018. "Life Cycle Environmental Impact Assessment of Circular Agriculture: A Case Study in Fuqing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Toro-Mujica, Paula & Aguilar, Claudio & Vera, Raúl R. & Bas, Fernando, 2017. "Carbon footprint of sheep production systems in semi-arid zone of Chile: A simulation-based approach of productive scenarios and precipitation patterns," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 22-38.
    3. Escribano, M. & Elghannam, A. & Mesias, F.J., 2020. "Dairy sheep farms in semi-arid rangelands: A carbon footprint dilemma between intensification and land-based grazing," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    4. Andrew K. Jorgenson, 2014. "Economic development and the carbon intensity of human well-being," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(3), pages 186-189, March.
    5. Tomić, Tihomir & Schneider, Daniel Rolph, 2018. "The role of energy from waste in circular economy and closing the loop concept – Energy analysis approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 268-287.
    6. Xu, Zihan & Wei, Hejie & Fan, Weiguo & Wang, Xuechao & Zhang, Peng & Ren, Jiahui & Lu, Nachuan & Gao, Zhicheng & Dong, Xiaobin & Kong, Weidong, 2019. "Relationships between ecosystem services and human well-being changes based on carbon flow—A case study of the Manas River Basin, Xinjiang, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Kavehei, Emad & Jenkins, G.A. & Adame, M.F. & Lemckert, C., 2018. "Carbon sequestration potential for mitigating the carbon footprint of green stormwater infrastructure," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1179-1191.
    8. Andrew Jorgenson, 2015. "Inequality and the carbon intensity of human well-being," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(3), pages 277-282, September.
    9. O'Brien, D. & Bohan, A. & McHugh, N. & Shalloo, L., 2016. "A life cycle assessment of the effect of intensification on the environmental impacts and resource use of grass-based sheep farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 95-104.
    10. repec:eee:ecoser:v:37:y:2019:i:c:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Ying Zhang & Xiaobin Dong & Xuechao Wang & Peng Zhang & Mengxue Liu & Yufang Zhang & Ruiming Xiao, 2023. "The Relationship between the Low-Carbon Industrial Model and Human Well-Being: A Case Study of the Electric Power Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-19, January.

    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. Jorgenson, Andrew & Schor, Juliet & Huang, Xiaorui, 2017. "Income Inequality and Carbon Emissions in the United States: A State-level Analysis, 1997–2012," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 40-48.
    2. Christina Ergas & Patrick Trent Greiner & Julius Alexander McGee & Matthew Thomas Clement, 2021. "Does Gender Climate Influence Climate Change? The Multidimensionality of Gender Equality and Its Countervailing Effects on the Carbon Intensity of Well-Being," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-23, April.
    3. Michael D. Briscoe & Jennifer E. Givens & Madeleine Alder, 2021. "Intersectional Indicators: A Race and Sex-Specific Analysis of the Carbon Intensity of Well-Being in the United States, 1998–2009," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 97-116, May.
    4. Julius Alexander McGee & Christina Ergas & Patrick Trent Greiner & Matthew Thomas Clement, 2017. "How do slums change the relationship between urbanization and the carbon intensity of well-being?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Luis Javier R. Barron & Aitor Andonegi & Gonzalo Gamboa & Eneko Garmendia & Oihana García & Noelia Aldai & Arantza Aldezabal, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Pasture-Based Dairy Sheep Systems: A Multidisciplinary and Multiscale Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-17, April.
    6. Farrell, L. & Herron, J. & Pabiou, T. & McHugh, N. & McDermott, K. & Shalloo, L. & O'Brien, D. & Bohan, A., 2022. "Modelling the production, profit, and greenhouse gas emissions of Irish sheep flocks divergent in genetic merit," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    7. Ling Bai & Tianran Guo & Wei Xu & Kang Luo, 2022. "The Spatial Differentiation and Driving Forces of Ecological Welfare Performance in the Yangtze River Economic Belt," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-21, November.
    8. Ryan Gunderson, 2019. "Work time reduction and economic democracy as climate change mitigation strategies: or why the climate needs a renewed labor movement," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 9(1), pages 35-44, March.
    9. Maione, A. & Massarotti, N. & Santagata, R. & Ulgiati, S. & Vanoli, L., 2023. "Integrated environmental accounting of a geothermal grid," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    10. Arnaldo T. Coelho & Gustavo B. Menezes & Terezinha C. de Brito Galvão & Joaquim F. T. Coelho, 2021. "Performance of Rolled Erosion Control Products (RECPs) as Bioswale Revetments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Huamei Shao & Gunwoo Kim & Qing Li & Galen Newman, 2021. "Web of Science-Based Green Infrastructure: A Bibliometric Analysis in CiteSpace," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, July.
    12. Usman Mehmood & Ephraim Bonah Agyekum & Salman Tariq & Zia Ul Haq & Solomon Eghosa Uhunamure & Joshua Nosa Edokpayi & Ayesha Azhar, 2022. "Socio-Economic Drivers of Renewable Energy: Empirical Evidence from BRICS," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-10, April.
    13. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Mo, Fei & Wang, Derek D., 2022. "Sustainable development of countries all over the world and the impact of renewable energy," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 320-331.
    14. Lee, Chien-Chiang & Xing, Wenwu & Lee, Chi-Chuan, 2022. "The impact of energy security on income inequality: The key role of economic development," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    15. Zhao, Congyu & Dong, Kangyin & Jiang, Hong-Dian & Wang, Kun & Dong, Xiucheng, 2023. "How does energy poverty eradication realize the path to carbon unlocking? The case of China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    16. Kai Zhu & Manya Tu & Yingcheng Li, 2022. "Did Polycentric and Compact Structure Reduce Carbon Emissions? A Spatial Panel Data Analysis of 286 Chinese Cities from 2002 to 2019," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-15, January.
    17. Ryan P. Thombs, 2018. "Has the relationship between non-fossil fuel energy sources and CO2 emissions changed over time? A cross-national study, 2000–2013," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(4), pages 481-490, June.
    18. Liu, Qianqian & Wang, Shaojian & Zhang, Wenzhong & Li, Jiaming & Kong, Yunlong, 2019. "Examining the effects of income inequality on CO2 emissions: Evidence from non-spatial and spatial perspectives," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 163-171.
    19. Sanchez, Luis F. & Stern, David I., 2016. "Drivers of industrial and non-industrial greenhouse gas emissions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 17-24.
    20. Emma Moberg & Hanna Karlsson Potter & Amanda Wood & Per-Anders Hansson & Elin Röös, 2020. "Benchmarking the Swedish Diet Relative to Global and National Environmental Targets—Identification of Indicator Limitations and Data Gaps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, February.

    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:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8230-:d:856556. 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.