Quantifying Biodiversity Co-benefits from Livestock Production A Case Study of Beef Grazing Management in Central Florida
Improved grazing management can enhance the multifunctionality of agroecosystems by drawing carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the atmosphere and into soils complementing international efforts to curb and cease CO2 emissions. The adoption of improved grazing strategies to mitigate climate change, however, may come at the expensive of other critical agroecosystem co-benefits like biodiversity, and understanding these tradeoffs is important for informed decision making. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is one approach to evaluate multiple environmental services associated with an agricultural product, i.e., 1 kg of beef live weight (LW). Few livestock LCAs include a biodiversity assessment due to difficulty and complexity in quantifying biodiversity impacts at appropriate spatial-temporal scales or beyond those associated with land use. We applied the recent Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Livestock Environmental Assessment Partnership (LEAP) biodiversity guidelines to a case study ranch located at Archbold Biological Stations Buck Island Ranch to 1) assist practitioners in understanding and differentiating between the regional (i.e., potential species loss) and site-specific (i.e., pressure-state-response) quantification approaches in the LEAP guidelines, and 2) evaluate the differences and similarities between the two approaches for quantifying biodiversity impacts under two types of pasture management. Our results illustrate how indicator selection and functional unit may result in discrepancies between the two approaches. Differences between methods can be attributed to differences in quantifying biodiversity impact potential species loss (land occupation) vs. biotic integrity (integrated measure of land and non-land related impacts) and whether biodiversity impacts are evaluated on a cumulative or a footprint basis. The growing global demand for livestock products and the interest in the livestock sector to capture and store atmospheric carbon demands that biodiversity impacts are incorporated into holistic evaluations of mitigation intervention co-benefits and tradeoffs.