Delta Life Cycle Assessment of Regenerative Agriculture in a Sheep Farming System

Conservation agriculture has no significant impact on sheep digestive parasitism

Conservation agriculture (CONS A) is a sustainable agriculture system based on crop rotation with no tillage. It has various environmental advantages compared to conventional agriculture (CONV A): decreased water evaporation, erosion, and CO2 emissions. In this first study of its kind, we aim to evaluate the impact of this type of agriculture on sheep gastrointestinal parasites. Two lamb groups aged between 5 and 10 months were randomly included to graze separately on CONS A and CONV A pastures. Each group was composed of two batches of three lambs, and these were followed up for two rearing months. Liveweight, hematological parameter variation, and digestive parasites were studied. At the end of the study period, lambs were slaughtered the carcass yield was determined, and a helminthological autopsy was performed on the digestive tracts of the animals to estimate different parasitological indicators. There was no difference between lambs reared on CONS A and those reared on CONV A for all parasite indicators (infestation intensity, abundance, and prevalence). The same trend was also obtained for hematological parameters, liveweight evolution, and carcass yield. These results prove that there is no impact of CONS A on the sheep's digestive parasitism. Further studies are needed to support these findings on larger animal samples and to investigate the impact of conservation agriculture on other parasite species. Similar studies could also be conducted on ruminant species.

A systematic review on whether regenerative agriculture improves animal welfare: A qualitative analysis with a One Welfare perspective

The welfare of animals in food-production systems is a cause of concern to the public. Regenerative agriculture was first used by the Rodale Institute and proposes to regenerate degraded components of ecosystems, aiming to be more than just sustainable. However, despite animal welfare being pushed to be part of the SDG agenda for 2030, there is no clarity on how regenerative agriculture impacts animal welfare. It is challenging to determine regenerative agriculture impacts on animal welfare, since it is not entirely defined. One Welfare could help define entry points for future research by studying animal welfare in connection with human welfare and environmental conservation. We aimed to analyse the extent to which positive animal welfare outcomes characterise regenerative agriculture systems in peer-reviewed articles and whether the narratives of such articles support that regenerative agriculture promotes animal welfare directly or indirectly by improving human welfare and environmental conservation. We searched papers including 'regenerative agriculture' using PRISMA-P, selecting animal welfare, human welfare, environment conservation terms, developed themes, and carried out analysis using Atlas.Ti8 and Causal Loop Diagram. We found that papers mainly linked animal welfare to animal health, human welfare to financial farm status and farmer's self-awareness, and environmental conservation to soil improvement. Causal Loop Diagram indicated that regenerative agriculture had the potential to improve the health and nutrition components of animal welfare by enhancing financial farmers' status/self-awareness (human welfare), and the soil (environmental conservation), reflecting that the processes that affect human welfare and environmental conservation could also affect animal welfare. However, information in papers remains insufficient to determine how regenerative agriculture impacts on animal welfare and research into regenerative agriculture needs to extend its focus on animal welfare and elucidate the regenerative agriculture principles leading to animal welfare.

Leveraging Campus Landscapes for Public Health: A Pilot Study to Understand the Psychological Effects of Urban Sheep Grazing on College Campuses

Since the 1980s, college students in the U.S. have self-reported a decline in their physical and emotional health. With these conditions compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic and its physical distancing restrictions, higher education institutions have an increased responsibility to establish strategic interventions and health-promoting programs for their students. Research collaborations between public health professionals and environmental designers have highlighted the benefits of environmental factors, such as wildlife, street trees, and public parks, on mental health. This pilot project aims to build upon the transdisciplinary dialogue between ecology, design, and public health by examining the social benefits of grazing lawnscape management, which is the practice of using herbivorous livestock to manage turfgrass areas. Through the design of an accessible central campus grazing space for a flock of 25 sheep and use of online questionnaires, a smartphone-based single-item survey, and open-ended feedback given via social media, the UC Davis Sheepmower Project addresses three primary questions: (1) Are there differences in self-reported stress levels and well-being between people who did not watch grazing sheep (no sheepmower group) compared with those who did watch grazing sheep (sheepmower group)? (2) Does holding sheep grazing events create opportunities for education about well-being and engagement with the campus community? (3) Can this type of urban grazing installation ultimately contribute to the overall identity of a college campus? Web-based questionnaire results indicate there is no significant difference in self-reported stress levels between the two groups; however, the moment-in-time smartphone-based single item question suggests that the presence of sheep provides temporary, noticeable relief and enhanced mood for those who observe the animals. Reflections posted on social media suggested that participants found the sheep grazing events fostered feelings of community and placemaking within the campus identity. However, the questionnaire sample indicated the grazing events did not have a significant effect on participants' sense of place or overall campus identity. This transdisciplinary effort breaks down traditionally siloed approaches to human and environmental health and is an example of a whole-systems approach to developing innovative solutions and encouraging applied collective action.

Comparison of farm-level greenhouse gas emissions in transhumance and semi-intensive sheep production systems in continental rangelands

Despite their predominance worldwide, few studies have been conducted to look at the impact of sheep production systems relying on transhumance practices in arid and continental conditions, on farm-level greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Using Turkey as an example, this paper examines on farm-level GHG emissions calculated for two contrasting sheep production systems under arid and continental climate conditions. Production and management data were obtained through face-to-face interviews carried out on 10 transhumance and 15 semi-intensive meat sheep farms in Turkey. A total of seven GHG emission estimates were then calculated for each farm with the Agricultural Resource Efficiency Calculator (AgRECalc©) tool; i) total Carbon Dioxide (CO2) from energy use (kg CO2e), ii) total Carbon Dioxide equivalent (CO2e) from methane (kg CO2e), iii) total CO₂e from nitrous oxide (kg CO₂e), iv) whole farm and enterprise CO₂e emissions (kg CO₂e), v) net emission from land use (kg CO₂e), vi) whole farm CO₂e emissions per kg of farm output (kg CO₂e/kg output), vii) product CO₂e emissions (meat): kg CO₂e / kg live weight, and viii) farm output (kg of sheep). Multivariate analyses (using R software) were carried out to compare both farm types and their respective carbon emissions. The total farm output per ewe was lower in the transhumance farms (7.4 kg/ewe) than in the semi-intensive farms (7.7 kg/ewe). The kg CO₂e per kg of output was also lower for the transhumance farms (46.2 kg CO₂e) than for the semi-intensive ones (56.5 kg CO₂e). This trend was similar for the amount of CO₂e per kg of live weight produced (20.8 kg and 25.4 kg for the transhumance and the semi-intensive farms, respectively). Despite overall net emissions from land use being greater on average for the transhumance farms, once measured per hectare, they were found to be lower than those for the semi-intensive farms. This study provides a reference point for different sheep production systems' GHG emission impact in continental rangelands in Turkey.

Regenerative Agriculture and Its Potential to Improve Farmscape Function

Recent reviews have identified major themes within regenerative agriculture—soil health, biodiversity, and socioeconomic disparities—but have so far been unable to clarify a definition based on practice and/or outcomes. In recent years, the concept has seen a rapid increase in farming, popular, and corporate interest, the scope of which now sees regenerative agriculture best viewed as a movement. To define and guide further practical and academic work in this respect, the authors have returned to the literature to explore the movement’s origins, intentions, and potential through three phases of work: early academic, current popular, and current academic. A consistent intention from early to current supporters sees the regeneration, or rebuilding, of agricultural resources, soil, water, biota, human, and energy as necessary to achieve a sustainable agriculture. This intention aligns well with international impetus to improve ecosystem function. The yet to be confirmed definition, an intention for iterative design, and emerging consumer and ecosystem service markets present several potential avenues to deliver these intentions. To assist, the authors propose the Farmscape Function framework, to monitor the impact of change in our agricultural resources over time, and a mechanism to support further data-based innovation. These tools and the movement’s intentions position regenerative agriculture as a state for rather than type of agriculture.

Defining and validating regenerative farm systems using a composite of ranked agricultural practices

Background: Ongoing efforts attempt to define farms as regenerative to aid marketers, policymakers, farmers, etc. The approach needs to balance precision with function, and must be transparent, simple, scalable, transferable, incorruptible, and replicable. Methods: We developed practice-based scoring systems to distinguish regenerative cropland and rangeland, and validate them based on whether these scores scaled with regenerative goals on actual farm operations. Study systems included cornfields of the Upper Midwest, almond orchards of California, and rangeland systems of the Northern Plains. Response variables included soil carbon and organic matter, soil micronutrients, water infiltration rates, soil microbial communities, plant community structure, invertebrate community structure, pest populations, yields, and profit. Results: Regenerative outcomes were strongly correlated with our approach to farm scoring. Soil organic matter, fine particulate organic matter, total soil carbon, total soil nitrogen, phosphorous, calcium and sulfur all increased alongside regenerative matrix scores in one or both of the cropping systems. Water infiltration rates were significantly faster in more regenerative almond orchards. Soil bacterial biomass and Haney soil health test scores were higher as cropland incorporated more regenerative practices. Plant species diversity and biomass increased significantly with the number of regenerative practices employed on almonds and rangelands. Invertebrate species diversity and richness were positively associated with regenerative practices in corn, almonds, and rangelands, whereas pest populations and almond yields were unaffected by the number of regenerative practices. Corn yields were negatively associated with more regenerative practices, while almond yields were unaffected by the number of regenerative practices. Profit was significantly higher on more regenerative corn and almond operations. Conclusions: Our scoring system scaled positively with desired regenerative outcomes, and provides the basis for predicting ecosystem responses with minimal information about the farming operation. Natural clusters in the number of regenerative practices used can be used to distinguish regenerative and conventional operations.