Covid-19 Research

Research Article

OCLC Number/Unique Identifier: 936130298

Is Danish Venison Production Environmentally Sustainable?

Environmental Sciences    Start Submission

Henrik Saxe*

Volume2-Issue7
Dates: Received: 2021-07-07 | Accepted: 2021-07-12 | Published: 2021-07-13
Pages: 555-562

Abstract

The objective of this study is to quantify the climate- and environmental impact of venison production from six wild life species in Denmark: Red deer, roe deer, fallow deer, wild boar, mallard and pheasant, and compare it with the environmental impact of commercially produced beef, pork and chicken in Denmark. The method for quantifying the impact of venison applied original LCI data obtained for the complete life cycle of Danish venison production of all six species, supplemented with data from Ecoinvent® and LCAFOOD on materials and processes involved in production of venison and industrial meat. Fodder, foraging on farmers’ fields, infrastructure, hunter/hunting and abattoir processes were analyzed separately using Simapro software applying the Stepwise® method. The results indicate that Danish venison production ranges from being slightly less, over being equally, to most often being far more environmentally harmful than the production of comparable industrial meat types. The main environmental impact originated from feed and foraging on farmer’s fields and mileage driven by the hunters was surprisingly high. Danish industrial meat from domestic animals is typically more environmentally friendly than Danish venison.

FullText HTML FullText PDF DOI: 10.37871/jbres1276


Certificate of Publication




Copyright

© 2021 Saxe H. Distributed under Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0

How to cite this article

Saxe H. Is Danish Venison Production Environmentally Sustainable? J Biomed Res Environ Sci. 2021 July 13; 2(7): 555-562. doi: 10.37871/jbres1276, Article ID: JBRES1276, Available at: https://www.jelsciences.com/articles/jbres1276.pdf


Subject area(s)

References


  1. Meyer C, et al. Grundlaget for Ny Nordisk Hverdagsmad – OPUS WP1 (In Danish). 2011. https://bit.ly/3xBtKbf
  2. Saxe H. The New Nordic Diet is an effective tool in environmental protection: it reduces the associated socioeconomic cost of diets. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 May;99(5):1117-25. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.113.066746. Epub 2014 Mar 26. PMID: 24670943.
  3. Weidema BP. Using the budget constraint to monetarise impact assessment results. Ecol Econ. 2009;68:1591-1598. https://bit.ly/3xDYyYG
  4. Petersen MR. Botanisk analyse af vomprøver af rådyr (Capreolus capreolus) fortrinsvis fra Borris Hede. MSc thesis (Danish), Botanisk Institut, Økologisk afdeling, Københavns Universitet. 1998. https://bit.ly/3xECi0R
  5. Kanstrup N, Madsen P, Stenkjær K, Buttenschøn RM, Jensen A. Kronvildt på Sjælland. Resultaterne af tre års praksisorienteret forskning og forvaltning. IGN Rapport, Copenhagen University. 2014. https://bit.ly/2U1PVZm
  6. Saxe H. Is Danish venison production environmentally sustainable? 2015.
  7. https://bit.ly/3eabdee
  8. Jacobsen LB, Jensen FS, Bakhtiari F, Thorsen BJ. Friluftslivets nationaløkonomiske fodaftryk. IFRO report 229. 2014.
  9. Persson UM, Johansson DJA, Cederberg C, Hedenus F, Bryngelsson D. Climate metrics and the carbon footprint of livestock products: where’s the beef? Environmental Research letters 10. 2015. https://bit.ly/2VBtsmx
  10. Swainson NM, Hoskin SO, Clark H, Pinares-Patiño CS, Brookes IM. Comparative methane emissions from cattle, red deer and sheep. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production. 2008;68:59-62. https://bit.ly/3kbHWDP
  11. Wiklund E, Malmfors G. Viltkött som resurs. Report in Swedish, 73 Pp. Naturvårdaverket. 2014. https://bit.ly/3kai0IP
  12. Asferg T. Vildtudbyttestatistik for jagtsæsonen 2010/11. Institut for Bioscience, Århus Institut. Notat fra DCE – Nationalt Center for Miljø og Energi. 2011.
  13. https://bit.ly/3ebVrja


Comments


Swift, Reliable, and studious. We aim to cherish the world by publishing precise knowledge.

  • Brown University Library
  • University of Glasgow Library
  • University of Pennsylvania, Penn Library
  • University of Amsterdam Library
  • The University of British Columbia Library
  • UC Berkeley’s Library
  • MIT Libraries
  • Kings College London University
  • University of Texas Libraries
  • UNSW Sidney Library
  • The University of Hong Kong Libraries
  • UC Santa Barbara Library
  • University of Toronto Libraries
  • University of Oxford Library
  • Australian National University
  • ScienceOpen
  • UIC Library
  • KAUST University Library
  • Cardiff University Library
  • Ball State University Library
  • Duke University Library
  • Rutgers University Library
  • Air University Library
  • UNT University of North Texas
  • Washington Research Library Consortium
  • Penn State University Library
  • Georgetown Library
  • Princeton University Library
  • Science Gate
  • Internet Archive
  • WashingTon State University Library
  • Dimensions
  • Zenodo
  • OpenAire
  • Index Copernicus International
  • icmje
  •  International Scientific Indexing (ISI)
  • Sherpa Romeo
  • ResearchGate
  • Universidad De Lima
  • WorldCat
  • JCU Discovery
  • McGill
  • National University of Singepore Libraries
  • SearchIT
  • Scilit
  • SemantiScholar
  • Base Search
  • VU
  • KB
  • Publons
  • oaji
  • Harvard University
  • sjsu-library
  • UWLSearch
  • Florida Institute of Technology
  • CrossRef
  • LUBsearch
  • Universitat de Paris
  • Technical University of Denmark
  • ResearchBIB
  • Google Scholar
  • Microsoft Academic Search