Eco-Efficiency Indicators in Traditional Iberian Pig Farms in the Dehesa Ecosystem: Integrated Economic and Environmental Performance

Salvato in:
Dettagli Bibliografici
Pubblicato in:Agriculture vol. 15, no. 23 (2025), p. 2515-2533
Autore principale: García-Gudiño, Javier
Altri autori: Perea José, Font-i-Furnols, Maria, Angón Elena, Blanco-Penedo, Isabel
Pubblicazione:
MDPI AG
Soggetti:
Accesso online:Citation/Abstract
Full Text + Graphics
Full Text - PDF
Tags: Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!

MARC

LEADER 00000nab a2200000uu 4500
001 3280927164
003 UK-CbPIL
022 |a 2077-0472 
024 7 |a 10.3390/agriculture15232515  |2 doi 
035 |a 3280927164 
045 2 |b d20250101  |b d20251231 
084 |a 231331  |2 nlm 
100 1 |a García-Gudiño, Javier  |u Animal Production, Centre of Scientific and Technological Research of Extremadura (CICYTEX), 06187 Guadajira, Spain 
245 1 |a Eco-Efficiency Indicators in Traditional Iberian Pig Farms in the <i>Dehesa</i> Ecosystem: Integrated Economic and Environmental Performance 
260 |b MDPI AG  |c 2025 
513 |a Journal Article 
520 3 |a The traditional Iberian pig production system in the dehesa ecosystem of southwestern Spain and Portugal represents a significant cultural and ecological model of extensive livestock farming currently facing sustainability challenges. This study aimed to identify eco-efficiency indicators by integrating economic and environmental dimensions across traditional Iberian pig farms. Structured surveys were conducted across 68 farms, complemented by life cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate environmental impacts including climate change, acidification, eutrophication, energy demand and land occupation. Multivariate statistical analysis identified two distinct farm types: Mixed-orientation Farms (MF, 45.59% of farms), characterised by diversified production phases and greater reliance on external inputs, and Acorn-Fed Farms (AF, 54.41% of farms), specialised in acorn-based fattening with greater dehesa ecosystem integration. AF demonstrated significantly lower environmental impacts across all categories except land occupation, with reductions ranging from 9% to 18% compared to MF. Furthermore, AF achieved superior eco-efficiency with gross margins 15% higher than MF and economic returns per unit of environmental impact 32% to 59% higher across all indicators. These findings demonstrate that farrow-to-finish farms specialised in montanera systems can simultaneously achieve greater profitability and reduced environmental impacts, providing a replicable model for sustainable livestock production in Mediterranean agroecosystems. 
653 |a Sustainable production 
653 |a Livestock 
653 |a Feeds 
653 |a Efficiency 
653 |a Questionnaires 
653 |a Eutrophication 
653 |a Life cycle assessment 
653 |a Farms 
653 |a Economics 
653 |a Environmental performance 
653 |a Sustainability 
653 |a Multivariate statistical analysis 
653 |a Livestock farming 
653 |a Cluster analysis 
653 |a Ecosystems 
653 |a Climate change 
653 |a Extensive farming 
653 |a Agricultural ecosystems 
653 |a Discriminant analysis 
653 |a Natural resources 
653 |a Hogs 
653 |a Life cycle analysis 
653 |a Statistical analysis 
653 |a Energy demand 
653 |a Environmental impact 
653 |a Multivariate analysis 
653 |a Swine production 
653 |a Acidification 
653 |a Variables 
653 |a Ecological models 
653 |a Integrated approach 
653 |a Livestock production 
653 |a Economic 
700 1 |a Perea José  |u Animal Production, University of Córdoba (UCO), 14071 Córdoba, Spain; pa2pemuj@uco.es (J.P.); eangon@uco.es (E.A.) 
700 1 |a Font-i-Furnols, Maria  |u Food Quality and Technology Program, Institute for Food and Agricultural Research and Technology (IRTA), 17121 Monells, Spain; maria.font@irta.cat 
700 1 |a Angón Elena  |u Animal Production, University of Córdoba (UCO), 14071 Córdoba, Spain; pa2pemuj@uco.es (J.P.); eangon@uco.es (E.A.) 
700 1 |a Blanco-Penedo, Isabel  |u Department of Animal Sciences, University of Lleida (Udl), 25918 Lleida, Spain; isabel.blancopenedo@udl.cat 
773 0 |t Agriculture  |g vol. 15, no. 23 (2025), p. 2515-2533 
786 0 |d ProQuest  |t Agriculture Science Database 
856 4 1 |3 Citation/Abstract  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3280927164/abstract/embedded/75I98GEZK8WCJMPQ?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text + Graphics  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3280927164/fulltextwithgraphics/embedded/75I98GEZK8WCJMPQ?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text - PDF  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3280927164/fulltextPDF/embedded/75I98GEZK8WCJMPQ?source=fedsrch