---

Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management 1(1) (2013) 65--83 | DOI:10.5890/JEAM.2013.01.006

Amalia Zucaro$^{1}$, Salvatore Mellino$^{1}$, Patrizia Ghisellini$^{2}$, Silvio Viglia$^{1}$

$^{1}$ Department of Sciences for the Environment, Parthenope University of Naples, Centro Direzionale - Isola C4, 80143, Napoli, Italy

$^{2}$ Alma Mater Studiorum – University of Bologna, Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Viale G. Fanin, 50 (40127), Bologna, Italy

Download Full Text PDF

 

Abstract

This paper evaluates the resource use and environmental performance of the Italian agricultural sector across levels, from local (selected olive, lemon and grape farms), through regional (Campania region) up to the national scale (whole Italy). An assessment over time (from 1985 to 2010) was performed in order to investigate how the demand for environmental support changed in the last twenty-five years. The performance indicators were calculated by using the Emergy Synthesis method in order to ascertain the emergy investment per unit of product (dry-mass, available energy, monetary value) as well as the overall sustainability of the process. Results point out both a decrease of renewability (%REN) and a higher dependence from imported resources (high Environmental Loading Ratio, ELR and low Emergy Yield Ratio, EYR) at all the scales investigated. The main factors affecting such indicators are the choice of crops mix, machinery use, climate conditions (mainly rainfall), market value of products, direct and indirect labor. A scenario analysis was implemented based on increased resource use efficiency in order to assess the sustainability improvement potential of the agricultural system.

References

1. [1]	MEA, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005), Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis, Island Press, Washington D.C, 138 pp.

2. [2]	IAASTD, International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge. (2008), Science and Technology for Development Agriculture at a Crossroads: Global Report, Island press, Washington DC, 590 pp.

3. [3]	Conforti, P. and Giampietro, M. (1997), Fossil energy use in agriculture: an international comparison. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 65, 231-243.

4. [4]	Odum, H.T. (1996), Environmental Accounting: Emergy and Environmental Decision Making, John Wiley and Sons. New York, 370 pp.

5. [5]	Brown, M.T. and Ulgiati, S. (2004), Emergy Analysis and Environmental Accounting, In: Encyclopedia of Energy, Elsevier, Oxford, UK: 329-354.

6. [6]	Brown, M.T. and Ulgiati, S. (2004), Energy quality, emergy, and transformity: H. T. Odum’s contribution to quantifying and understanding systems, Ecological Modeling, 178, 201-213.

7. [7]	Franzese, P.P., Rydberg, T., Russo, G.F. and Ulgiati, S. (2009). Sustainable biomass production: A comparison between Gross Energy Requirement and Emergy Synthesis methods. Ecological Indicators, 9, 959-970.

8. [8]	ISTAT, National Institute of Statistics. (1985), Agricultural statistics handbook, Roma, Italy. www.istat.it.

9. [9]	ISTAT, National Institute of Statistics. (1993), Agricultural statistics handbook, Roma, Italy. www.istat.it.

10. [10]	ISTAT, National Institute of Statistics. (2002), Agricultural statistics handbook, Roma, Italy. www.istat.it.

11. [11]	ISTAT, National Institute of Statistics. (2006), Agricultural statistics handbook, Roma, Italy. www.istat.it.

12. [12]	ISTAT, National Institute of Statistics. (2012), Agricultural statistics handbook, Roma, Italy. www.istat.it.

13. [13]

    Ulgiati, S., Odum, H.T. and Bastianoni, S. (1993), Emergy Analysis of Italian Agriculture System. The role of Energy Quality and Environmental Inputs. In “Trends in Ecological Physical Chemistry”; L. Bonati, U. Cosentino, M. Lasagni, G. Moro, D. Pitea and A. Schiraldi Editors, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, the Nederlands, 187-215.

14. [14]	Odum, H.T. (1988), Self-organization, transformity and information, Science, 242, 1132-1139.