Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Animal Board Invited Review: Comparing conventional and organic livestock production systems on different aspects of sustainability

  • C. P. A. van Wagenberg (a1), Y. de Haas (a2), H. Hogeveen (a3), M. M. van Krimpen (a4), M. P. M. Meuwissen (a3), C. E. van Middelaar (a5) and T. B. Rodenburg (a6)...
Abstract

To sustainably contribute to food security of a growing and richer world population, livestock production systems are challenged to increase production levels while reducing environmental impact, being economically viable, and socially responsible. Knowledge about the sustainability performance of current livestock production systems may help to formulate strategies for future systems. Our study provides a systematic overview of differences between conventional and organic livestock production systems on a broad range of sustainability aspects and animal species available in peer-reviewed literature. Systems were compared on economy, productivity, environmental impact, animal welfare and public health. The review was limited to dairy cattle, beef cattle, pigs, broilers and laying hens, and to Europe, North America and New Zealand. Results per indicators are presented as in the articles without performing additional calculations. Out of 4171 initial search hits, 179 articles were analysed. Studies varied widely in indicators, research design, sample size and location and context. Quite some studies used small samples. No study analysed all aspects of sustainability simultaneously. Conventional systems had lower labour requirements per unit product, lower income risk per animal, higher production per animal per time unit, higher reproduction numbers, lower feed conversion ratio, lower land use, generally lower acidification and eutrophication potential per unit product, equal or better udder health for cows and equal or lower microbiological contamination. Organic systems had higher income per animal or full time employee, lower impact on biodiversity, lower eutrophication and acidification potential per unit land, equal or lower likelihood of antibiotic resistance in bacteria and higher beneficial fatty acid levels in cow milk. For most sustainability aspects, sometimes conventional and sometimes organic systems performed better, except for productivity, which was consistently higher in conventional systems. For many aspects and animal species, more data are needed to conclude on a difference between organic and conventional livestock production systems.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Animal Board Invited Review: Comparing conventional and organic livestock production systems on different aspects of sustainability
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Animal Board Invited Review: Comparing conventional and organic livestock production systems on different aspects of sustainability
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Animal Board Invited Review: Comparing conventional and organic livestock production systems on different aspects of sustainability
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Corresponding author
E-mail: coen.vanwagenberg@wur.nl
References
Hide All
Alexandratos, N and Bruinsma, J 2012. World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision. FAO, ESA working paper No. 12-03. Rome, Italy. Retrieved on 13 December 2016 from http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/ap106e/ap106e.pdf.
Álvarez-Fernández, E, Domínguez-Rodríguez, J, Capita, R and Alonso-Calleja, C 2012. Influence of housing systems on microbial load and antimicrobial resistance patterns of Escherichia coli isolates from eggs produced for human consumption. Journal of Food Protection 75, 847853.
Alvasen, K, Mork, MJ, Sandgren, CH, Thomsen, PT and Emanuelson, U 2012. Herd-level risk factors associated with cow mortality in Swedish dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 43524362.
Bennedsgaard, TW, Klaas, IC and Vaarst, M 2010. Reducing use of antimicrobials – experiences from an intervention study in organic dairy herds in Denmark. Livestock Science 131, 183192.
Butler, G, Collomb, M, Rehberger, B, Sanderson, R, Eyre, M and Leifert, C 2009. Conjugated linoleic acid isomer concentrations in milk from high- and low-input management dairy systems. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 89, 697705.
Capper, JL, Castañeda-Gutiérrez, E, Cady, RA and Bauman, DE 2008. The environmental impact of recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST) use in dairy production. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105, 96689673.
Cederberg, C and Mattsson, B 2000. Life cycle assessment of milk production – a comparison of conventional and organic farming. Journal of Cleaner Production 8, 4960.
Chen, X and Corson, MS 2014. Influence of emission-factor uncertainty and farm-characteristic variability in LCA estimates of environmental impacts of French dairy farms. Journal of Cleaner Production 81, 150157.
Codex Alimentarius Commission 2007. Organically produced foods. World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
De Vries, M, Van Middelaar, CE and De Boer, IJM 2015. Comparing environmental impacts of beef production systems: a review of life cycle assessments. Livestock Science 178, 279288.
Del Prado, A, Misselbrook, T, Chadwick, D, Hopkins, A, Dewhurst, RJ, Davison, P, Butlerd, A, Schröder, J and Scholefield, D 2011. SIMS DAIRY: a modelling framework to identify sustainable dairy farms in the UK. Framework description and test for organic systems and N fertiliser optimisation. Science of the Total Environment 409, 39934009.
Eisler, MC, Lee, MRF, Tarlton, JF, Martin, GB, Beddington, J, Dungait, JAJ, Greathead, H, Liu, J, Mathew, S, Miller, H, Misselbrook, T, Murray, P, Vinod, VK, Robert, VS and Michael, W 2014. Steps to sustainable livestock. Nature 507, 3234.
Foley, JA, Ramankutty, N, Brauman, KA, Cassidy, ES, Gerber, JS, Johnston, M, Mueller, ND, O/‘Connell, C, Ray, DK, West, PC, Balzer, C, Bennett, EM, Carpenter, SR, Hill, J, Monfreda, C, Polasky, S, Rockstrom, J, Sheehan, J, Siebert, S, Tilman, D and Zaks, DPM 2011. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478, 337342.
Garcia, JM and Teixeira, P 2017. Organic versus conventional food: a comparison regarding food safety. Food Reviews International 33, 424446.
Gerber, PJ, Steinfeld, H, Henderson, B, Mottet, A, Opio, C, Dijkman, J, Falcucci, A and Tempio, G 2013. Tackling climate change through livestock – A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. Retrieved on 13 December 2016 from http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3437e/index.html.
Godfray, HCJ, Beddington, JR, Crute, IR, Haddad, L, Lawrence, D, Muir, JF, Pretty, J, Robinson, S, Thomas, SM and Toulmin, C 2010. Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 327, 812818.
Halberg, N, Van Der Werf, HMG, Basset-Mens, C, Dalgaard, R and De Boer, IJM 2005. Environmental assessment tools for the evaluation and improvement of European livestock production systems. Livestock Production Science 96, 3350.
Hardeng, F and Edge, VL 2001. Mastitis, ketosis, and milk fever in 31 organic and 93 conventional Norwegian dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 26732679.
Hovi, M, Sundrum, A and Thamsborg, SM 2003. Animal health and welfare in organic livestock production in Europe: current state and future challenges. Livestock Production Science 80, 4153.
Knage-Rasmussen, KM, Houe, H, Rousing, T and Sorensen, JT 2014. Herd- and sow-related risk factors for lameness in organic and conventional sow herds. Animal 8, 121127.
Langford, FM, Rutherford, KMD, Sherwood, L, Jack, MC, Lawrence, AB and Haskell, MJ 2011. Behavior of cows during and after peak feeding time on organic and conventional dairy farms in the United Kingdom. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 746753.
Lebacq, T, Baret, P and Stilmant, D 2013. Sustainability indicators for livestock farming. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 33, 311327.
Mazengia, E, Samadpour, M, Hill, HW, Greeson, K, Tenney, K, Liao, G, Huang, X and Meschke, JS 2014. Prevalence, concentrations, and antibiotic sensitivities of Salmonella serovars in poultry from retail establishments in Seattle, Washington. Journal of Food Protection 77, 885893.
Miranda, JM, Mondragon, A, Vázquez, BI, Fente, CA, Cepeda, A and Franco, CM 2009. Microbiological quality and antimicrobial resistance of Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus isolated from conventional and organic ‘Arzua-Ulloa’ cheese. Cyta – Journal of Food 7, 103110.
O’Donnell, AM, Spatny, KP, Vicini, JL and Bauman, DE 2010. Survey of the fatty acid composition of retail milk differing in label claims based on production management practices. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 19181925.
Ray, KA, Warnick, LD, Mitchell, RM, Kaneene, JB, Ruegg, PL, Wells, SJ, Fossler, CP, Halbert, LW and May, K 2006. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Salmonella from organic and conventional dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 20382050.
Rembiałkowska, E and Średnicka, D 2009. Organic food quality and impact on human health. Agronomy Research 7, 719727.
Richert, RM, Cicconi, KM, Gamroth, MJ, Schukken, YH, Stiglbauer, KE and Ruegg, PL 2013. Risk factors for clinical mastitis, ketosis, and pneumonia in dairy cattle on organic and small conventional farms in the United States. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 42694285.
Smith-Spangler, C, Brandeau, ML, Hunter, GE, Bavinger, JC, Pearson, M, Eschbach, PJ, Sundaram, V, Liu, H, Schirmer, P, Stave, C, Olkin, I and Bravata, DM 2012. Are organic foods safer or healthier than conventional alternatives? A systematic review. Annals of Internal Medicine 157, 348366.
Steinfeld, H, Gerber, P, Wassenaar, T, Castel, V, Rosales, M and de Haan, C 2006. Livestock’s long shadow: environmental issues and options. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy. Retrieved on 13 December 2016 from http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM.
Thomassen, MA, Van Calker, KJ, Smits, MCJ, Iepema, GL and De Boer, IJM 2008. Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands. Agricultural Systems 96, 95107.
Tuyttens, F, Heyndrickx, M, De Boeck, M, Moreels, A, Van Nuffel, A, Van Poucke, E, Van Coillie, E, Van Dongen, S and Lens, L 2008. Broiler chicken health, welfare and fluctuating asymmetry in organic versus conventional production systems. Livestock Science 113, 123132.
Valle, PS, Lien, G, Flaten, O, Koesling, M and Ebbesvik, M 2007. Herd health and health management in organic versus conventional dairy herds in Norway. Livestock Science 112, 123132.
Van Asselt, ED, Van Bussela, LGJ, Van der Voet, H, Van der Heijden, GWAM, Tromp, SO, Rijgersberg, H, Van Evertb, F, Van Wagenberg, CPA and Van der Fels-Klerx, HJ 2014. A protocol for evaluating the sustainability of agri-food production systems – a case study on potato production in peri-urban agriculture in The Netherlands. Ecological Indicators 43, 315321.
Van der Werf, HMG, Kanyarushoki, C and Corson, MS 2009. An operational method for the evaluation of resource use and environmental impacts of dairy farms by life cycle assessment. Journal of Environmental Management 90, 36433652.
Van Loo, EJ, Alali, W and Ricke, SC 2012. Food safety and organic meats. Annual Review of Food Science and Technology 3, 203225.
Van Zanten, HHE, Mollenhorst, H, Klootwijk, CW, Van Middelaar, CE and De Boer, IJM 2016. Global food supply: land use efficiency of livestock systems. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 21, 747758.
Wilhelm, B, Rajić, A, Waddell, L, Parker, S, Harris, J, Roberts, KC, Kydd, R, Greig, J and Baynton, A 2009. Prevalence of zoonotic or potentially zoonotic bacteria, antimicrobial resistance, and somatic cell counts in organic dairy production: current knowledge and research gaps. Foodborne Pathogens and Disease 6, 525539.
Williams, AG, Audsley, E and Sandars, DL 2006. Energy and environmental burdens of organic and non-organic agriculture and horticulture. Aspects of Applied Biology 79, 1923.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

animal
  • ISSN: 1751-7311
  • EISSN: 1751-732X
  • URL: /core/journals/animal
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

van Wagenberg supplementary material
Table S7

 Word (61 KB)
61 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

van Wagenberg supplementary material
Table S2

 Word (56 KB)
56 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

van Wagenberg supplementary material
Table S3

 Word (62 KB)
62 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

van Wagenberg supplementary material
Table S4

 Word (104 KB)
104 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

van Wagenberg supplementary material
Table S6

 Word (195 KB)
195 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

van Wagenberg supplementary material
Table S5

 Word (252 KB)
252 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

van Wagenberg supplementary material
Table S8

 Word (61 KB)
61 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

van Wagenberg supplementary material
Table S1

 Word (38 KB)
38 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 148
Total number of PDF views: 1282 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 3513 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 31st May 2017 - 23rd July 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.