Transhumance, livestock mobility and mutual benefits between crop and livestock production

Grazing-based livestock production, named pastoralism, is classified into nomadism, transhumance and agro-pastoralism. Transhumance is characterised by the seasonal and recurring movement of livestock whereby seasonal grazing areas and routes for livestock movement are fixed. All grazing based livestock production systems including transhumance are constrained globally for a variety of reasons. The major threats to the system are globalisation, nationalisation or privatisation of rangelands, national parks and community forestry policies restricting free grazing and shortage of labour. The collapse or decline of such social-ecological systems (SESs), which have existed for over 1000s years, often induces adverse impacts on societies and ecosystems. Here we review the literature on transhumance, and discuss reasons for transhumance, and the associated advantages and disadvantages of livestock movement in transhumance. Our review also focuses on how the integration of crop and livestock production in transhumance derives mutual benefits. The review indicates that the seasonal movement of livestock is an ecological necessity in areas with harsh climates and low pasture production. Transhumance is also a herders’ adaptive management to adjust to variable grazing resources and environmental conditions. The disadvantages of seasonal movement of livestock such as greater herding labour required and expenditure of more energy for livestock, are far outweighed by the ecological advantages. Some of these are: to minimise grazing competition and to protect rangeland pastures from being overgrazed. Our review also indicates that the integration of crop and livestock production derives mutual benefits and contributes for their enhanced sustainability

(Blue) Growth accounting in small-scale European Union fleets

Fisheries account for one-third of the total jobs in the global ocean economies. Small scale fleets (SSF) fisheries are the main segment from the number of jobs point of view, and in the EU, SSF account for over 40% of employment in the fisheries sector. Given this marine employment source, it is important to analyse SSF's productivity growth. This was done using Total Factor Productivity (TFP), which is dened as the portion of output not explained by the traditionally measured inputs of labour, energy and capital used in production. TFP calculation is relevant to understand the technology evolution in fisheries and as a reference for management assessment. TFP was calculated for SSF in two EU main sea areas, the Mediterranean (FAO area 37) and the North-East Atlantic (FAO area 27). Constant elasticity production functions were used to analyse the intensity of the use of production factors and how these are substituted or complemented when producing. Additionally, TFP was corrected by stock evolution indexes to evaluate the EU conservation policy. Results showed how the TFP presented signs of stagnation when stocks status were considered. This implies a low technological evolution and that the use of production factors is to be reduced in the following years. It was concluded that in the North-East Atlantic the EU conservation policy is obtaining the objective of restoring fish stocks and contributing to maintaining the productivity. In the Mediterranean, the stocks are not being restored, therefore not contributing to growth as a production factor. Finally, it is concluded that in neither areas the conservation policy is enough to provide positive productivity trends.JRC.D.2-Water and Marine Resource