Tackling unintended consequences of grazing livestock farming: Multi-scale assessment of co-benefits and trade-offs for water pollution mitigation scenarios

A farm-to-landscape scale modelling framework combining regulating services and life cycle assessment midpoint impacts for air and water was used to explore the co-benefits and trade-offs of alternative management futures for grazing livestock farms. Two intervention scenarios were compared: one using on-farm interventions typically recommended following visual farm audits (visually-based) and the other using mechanistical understanding of nutrient and sediment losses to water (mechanistically-based). At farm scale, reductions in business as-usual emissions to water of total phosphorus (TP) and sediment, using both the visually-based and mechanistically-based scenarios, were <5%. These limited impacts highlighted the important role of land drains and the lack of relevant on-farm measures in current recommended advisory lists for the soil types in question. The predicted impacts of both scenarios on free draining soils were significantly higher; TP reductions of-9% (visually-based) and-20% (mechanistically-based) compared with corresponding respective estimates of >20% and >35% for sediment. Key co-benefits at farm scale included reductions in nitrous oxide emissions and improvements in physical soil quality, whereas an increase in ammonia emissions was the principal trade-off. At landscape scale, simulated reductions in business-as-usual losses were <3% for both pollutants for both scenarios. The visually-based and mechanistically-based scenarios narrowed the gaps between current and modern background sediment loads by 6% and 11%, respectively. The latter scenario also improved the reduction of GWP100 relative to business-as-usual by 4%, in comparison to 1% for the former. However, with the predicted increase of ammonia emissions, both eutrophication potential and acidification potential increased (e.g., by 7% and 14% for the mechanistically-based scenario). The discrepancy of on-farm intervention efficacy across spatial scales generated by non-agricultural water pollutant sources is a key challenge for addressing water quality problems at landscape scale.

Automated summary

This study used a farm-to-landscape scale modelling framework to explore the co-benefits and trade-offs of different management scenarios for grazing livestock farms. The results showed that the mechanistically-based scenario had higher effectiveness in reducing emissions to water, but also led to increased ammonia emissions. Additionally, the discrepancy in on-farm intervention efficacy caused by non-agricultural water pollutant sources is a key challenge for addressing water quality problems at the landscape scale.