Advertisement

Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 365–374 | Cite as

An economic assessment of drought effects on three grassland systems in Switzerland

  • Robert Finger
  • Anna Katarina Gilgen
  • Ulrich E. Prechsl
  • Nina Buchmann
Original Article

Abstract

This paper analyzes the economic impacts of summer drought on Swiss grassland production. We combine field trial data from drought experiments in three different grasslands in Switzerland with site-specific information on economic costs and benefits. The analysis focuses on the economic implications of drought effects on grassland yields as well as grassland composition. In agreement with earlier studies, we found rather heterogeneous yield effects of drought on Swiss grassland systems, with significantly reduced yields as a response to drought at the lowland and sub-alpine sites, but increased yields at the wetter pre-alpine site. Relative yield losses were highest at the sub-alpine site (with annual yield losses of up to 37 %). However, because income from grassland production at extensive sites relies to a large extent on ecological direct payments, even large yield losses had only limited implications in terms of relative profit reductions. In contrast, negative drought impacts at the most productive, intensively managed lowland site were dominant, with average annual drought-induced profit margin reductions of about 28 %. This is furthermore emphasized if analyzing the farm level perspective of drought impacts. Combining site-specific effects at the farm level, we found that in particular farms with high shares of lowland grassland sites suffer from summer droughts in terms of farm-level fodder production and profit margins. Moreover, our results showed that the higher competitiveness of weeds (broad-leaved dock) under drought conditions will require increasing attention on weed control measures in future grassland production systems. Taking into account that the risk of drought occurrence is expected to increase in the coming years, additional instruments to cope with drought risks in fodder production and finally farmers’ income have to be developed.

Keywords

Drought Grassland Weeds Yield Economic costs and benefits 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The paper is a contribution to the activities of the National Centre of Competence in Research on Climate (NCCR Climate) supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation. We would like to thank Simon Briner for providing information on census data and helpful comments, as well as two anonymous reviewers and the editor for constructive comments and very helpful suggestions.

References

  1. AGRIDEA and FiBL (2010) Deckungsbeiträge 2010. Swiss Association for the Development of Rural Areas (AGRIDEA) and Research Institute for Organic Agriculture (FiBL), SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  2. Annicchiarico P, Proiett S (2010) White clover selected for enhanced competitive ability widens the compatibility with grasses and favours the optimization of legume content and forage yield in mown clover-grass mixtures. Grass Forage Sci 65:318–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beniston M (2004) The 2003 heat wave in Europe: a shape of things to come? An analysis based on Swiss climatological data and model simulations. Geophys Res Lett 31:L02202. doi: 10.1029/2003GL018857 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bloor JMG, Pichon P, Falcimagne R, Leadley P, Soussana J-F (2010) Effects of warming, summer drought, and CO2 enrichment on aboveground biomass production, flowering phenology, and community structure in an upland grassland ecosystem. Ecosystems 13:888–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. BLW (2009) Direktzahlungsverordnung. Bundesamt für Landwirtschaft (BLW)—Swiss Federal Office for Agriculture, BernGoogle Scholar
  6. BLW (2012) Agrarinformationssystem AGIS. Bundesamt für Landwirtschaft (BLW)—Swiss Federal Office for Agriculture, BernGoogle Scholar
  7. Briner S, Finger R (2012) Bio-economic modeling of decisions under yield and price risk for suckler cow farms. In: 123rd EAAE Seminar “Price Volatility and Farm Income Stabilisation”, Dublin, Feb 23rd–24th 2012Google Scholar
  8. Brown I, Poggio L, Gimona A, Castellazzi M (2011) Climate change, drought risk and land capability for agriculture: implications for land use in Scotland. Reg Environ Change 11:503–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bütof A, von Riedmatten LR, Dormann CF, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Welk E, Bruelheide H (2012) The responses of grassland plants to experimentally simulated climate change depend on land use and region. Glob Change Biol 18:127–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Calanca P (2007) Climate change and drought occurrence in the Alpine region: how severe are becoming the extremes? Glob Planet Change 57:151–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Calanca P, Fuhrer J (2005) Swiss agriculture in a changing climate grassland production and its economic value. In: Haurie A, Viguier L (eds) The coupling of climate and economic dynamics, essays on integrated assessment, advances in global change research, vol 22. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 341–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cavers PB, Harper JL (1964) Rumex obtusifolius L. and R. crispus L. J Ecol 52:737–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Christensen JH, Hewitson B, Busuioc A, Chen A, Gao X, Held I, Jones R, Kolli RK, Kwon W-T, Laprise R, Magaña Rueda V, Mearns L, Menéndez CG, Räisänen J, Rinke A, Sarr A, Whetto P (2007) Regional climate projections. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 847–940Google Scholar
  14. Ciais P, Reichstein M, Viovy N, Granier A, Ogee J, Allard V, Aubinet M, Buchmann N, Bernhofer C, Carrara A, Chevallier F, De Noblet N, Friend AD, Friedlingstein P, Grunwald T, Heinesch B, Keronen P, Knohl A, Krinner G, Loustau D, Manca G, Matteucci G, Miglietta F, Ourcival JM, Papale D, Pilegaard K, Rambal S, Seufert G, Soussana JF, Sanz MJ, Schulze ED, Versala T, Valentini R (2005) Europe-wide reduction in primary productivity caused by the heat and drought in 2003. Nature 437:529–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. EEA (2005) Vulnerability and adaptation to climate change in Europe. European Environment Agency (EEA). Technical report no 7/2005Google Scholar
  16. El Benni N, Lehmann B (2010) Swiss agricultural policy reform: landscape changes in consequence of national agricultural policy and international competition pressure. In: Primdahl J, Swaffield S (eds) Globalisation and agricultural landscapes—change patterns and policy trends in developed countries. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 73–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Finger R (2012) Biases in farm-level yield risk analysis due to data aggregation. Ger J Agric Econ 61:30–43Google Scholar
  18. Finger R, Calanca P (2011) Risk management strategies to cope with climate change in grassland production: an illustrative case study for the Swiss plateau. Reg Environ Change 11:935–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Finger R, Lehmann N (2012) The influence of direct payments on farmers’ hail insurance decisions. Agric Econ 43:341–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Finger R, Lazzarotto P, Calanca P (2010) Bio-economic assessment of climate change impacts on managed grassland production. Agric Syst 103:666–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Frame J, Newbold P (1986) Agronomy of white clover. Adv Agron 40:1–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Frei C, Schöll R, Fukutome S, Schmidli J, Vidale PL (2006) Future change of precipitation extremes in Europe: intercomparison of scenarios from regional climate models. J Geophys Res Atmos 111:D06105. doi: 10.1029/2005JD005965 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fuhrer J, Beniston M, Fischlin A, Frei C, Goyette S, Jasper K, Pfister C (2006) Climate risks and their impact on agriculture and forests in Switzerland. Clim Change 79:79–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gilgen AK, Buchmann N (2009) Response of temperate grasslands at different altitudes to simulated summer drought differed but scaled with annual precipitation. Biogeosciences 6:2525–2539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gilgen AK, Signarbieux C, Feller U, Buchmann N (2010) Competitive advantage of Rumex obtusifolius L. might increase in intensively managed temperate grasslands under drier climate. Agric Ecosyst Environ 135:15–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Harrington KC, Thatcher A, Kemp PD (2006) Mineral composition and nutritive value of some common pasture weeds. N Z Plant Prot 59:261–265Google Scholar
  27. Hebeisen T, Lüscher A, Zanetti S, Fischer BU, Hartwig UA, Frehner M, Hendrey GR, Blum H, Nösberger J (1997) Growth response of Trifolium repens L. and Lolium perenne L. as monocultures and bi-species mixture to free air CO2 enrichment and management. Glob Change Biol 3:149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hejduk S, Doležal P (2004) Nutritive value of broad-leaved dock (Rumex obtusifolius L.) and its effect on the quality of grass silages. Czech J Anim Sci 49:144–150Google Scholar
  29. Hopkins A, Del Prado A (2007) Implications of climate change for grassland in Europe: impacts, adaptations and mitigation options: a review. Grass Forage Sci 62:118–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lamarque P, Tappeiner U, Turner C, Steinbacher M, Bardgett RD, Szukics U, Schermer M, Lavorel S (2011) Stakeholder perceptions of grassland ecosystem services in relation to knowledge on soil fertility and biodiversity. Reg Environ Change 11:791–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lazzarotto P, Calanca P, Fuhrer J (2009) Dynamics of grass-clover mixtures—an analysis of the response to management with the PROductive GRASsland Simulator (PROGRASS). Ecol Model 220:703–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lazzarotto P, Calanca P, Semenov M, Fuhrer J (2010) Transient responses to increasing CO2 and climate change in unfertilized grass-clover mixtures. Clim Res 41:221–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lehmann J, Zihlmann U, Briner HU (1981) Überlegungen zum Klee-Gras-Anbau. Schweiz Landw Monats 59:365–378Google Scholar
  34. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  35. Olesen JE, Bindi M (2002) Consequences of climate change for European agricultural productivity, land use and policy. Eur J Agron 16:239–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pötsch EM (2001) Wissenswertes zur mechanischen und chemischen Ampferbekämpfung. In: 7. Alpenländisches Expertenforum, Gumpenstein, Bundesanstalt für alpenländische Landwirtschaft (ed), pp 75–81, 22–23 März 2001Google Scholar
  37. Quétier F, Rivoal F, Marty P, De Chazal J, Lavorel S (2010) Social representations of an alpine grassland landscape and socio-political discourses on rural development. Reg Environ Change 10:119–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. SBV (2011) Statistische Erhebungen und Schätzungen über Landwirtschaft und Ernährung. Schweizer Bauernverband (SBV, Swiss Farmers’ Union), BruggGoogle Scholar
  39. Schär C, Vidale PL, Lüthi D, Frei C, Häberli C, Liniger MA, Appenzeller C (2004) The role of increasing temperature variability in European summer heatwaves. Nature 427:332–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schubiger FX, Lehmann J (1994) Futterwert unterschiedlich genutzter Klee-Gras-Gemenge. Agrarforschung 1:167–170Google Scholar
  41. Sheffield J, Wood EF (2008) Projected changes in drought occurrence under future global warming from multi-model, multi-scenario, IPCC AR4 simulations. Clim Dyn 31:79–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sieber R, Hollenstein L, Odden B, Hurni L (2011) From classic atlas design to collaborative platforms – The SwissAtlasPlatform Project. In: Proceedings of the 25th international conference of the ICA, Paris, France, 2011Google Scholar
  43. Smit HJ, Metzger MJ, Ewert F (2008) Spatial distribution of grassland productivity and land use in Europe. Agric Syst 98:208–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Soussana J-F, Lüscher A (2007) Temperate grasslands and global atmospheric change: a review. Grass Forage Sci 62:127–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stilmant D, Knoden D, Bodson B, Luxen P, Herman J, Vrancken C, Losseau C (2007) Broad-leaved dock in grassland farming systems: importance of the problems raised, chemical control and control by alternative methods (in French, summary in English). Fourrages 192:477–493Google Scholar
  46. van Dorland HA, Wettstein H-R, Aeschlimann G, Leuenberger H, Kreuzer M (2007) Preference of dairy cows for ryegrass, white clover and red clover, and its effects on nutrient supply and milk quality. Arch Tierernahr 61:371–389Google Scholar
  47. Weber M, Schild A (2007) Stand der Bewässerung in der Schweiz—Bericht zur Umfrage 2006. Swiss Federal Office for Agriculture, BernGoogle Scholar
  48. Yuen KK (1974) The two-sample trimmed t for unequal population variances. Biometrika 61:165–170Google Scholar
  49. Zaller JG (2004) Ecology and non-chemical control of Rumex crispus and R. obtusifolius (Polygonaceae): a review. Weed Res 44:414–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Finger
    • 1
  • Anna Katarina Gilgen
    • 2
  • Ulrich E. Prechsl
    • 3
  • Nina Buchmann
    • 3
  1. 1.Wageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Institute of Plant Sciences and Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research, University of BernBernSwitzerland
  3. 3.Institute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations