Ecosystem services and disservices associated with pastoral systems from Patagonia, Argentina – A review

Abstract

Pastoral systems worldwide secure rural livelihoods in the harshest environments on Earth. Their low productivity per area unit or head makes them the subject of much criticism with regard to their environmental impact, particularly in relation to global warming, desertification and land degradation. Such is the case of the traditional pastoral systems of Patagonia, a vast and isolated region where sedentary and mobile pastoralism coexist and contribute to shape landscapes and cultures. We argue that pastoral systems provide a wide range of ecosystem services that may compensate for their negative impact on the environment. We review the scarcely available evidence from Patagonia to identify ecosystem services and disservices associated with pastoralism, and pay special attention to the carbon balance: with C footprints between 10 to 40 kg CO2-eq.kg−1 carcass, pastoral systems in dry Patagonia are below or within the range of semi-extensive livestock systems worldwide (35–45 CO2-eq. kg−1 carcass). To inform development and policy, the assessment of trade-offs and synergies between ecosystem services needs to incorporate the intertwined social and ecological dynamics of complex pastoral systems, along resource regenerative trajectories.

Rise from the ashes! Resilience patterns in Patagonia pastoralist communities

“…There are two officially recognized communities of native people in the area and a few commercialization cooperatives that trade in wool, seeds and animal feeds. Family pastoral systems are diverse, raising sheep for wool, and other animal species for fiber, leather, meat, milk, eggs, work, companionship, and as savings in a context of recurring macro‐economic instability (Tittonell et al, 2021). Family farms grow small areas of forage species, vegetables and fruit trees, and some carry out rural‐tourism activities.…”

“…Maintaining livestock numbers over time is a challenge in marginal and remote drylands, and depends much more on social than natural capital. Livestock are the main economic asset of pastoral households, act as a banking system in non-financial societies, and are regularly sold, bought, moved, exchanged or slaughtered according to household needs; maintaining livestock numbers implies complex negotiations at community level for grazing resources and transhumant routes (Tittonell et al, 2021). Thus, when looking at livestock dynamics, we are not looking at the genetic characteristics determining livestock rusticity or the ecology of native rangelands.…”

“…As in other drylands around the world, pastoralism represents the main livelihood of the rural households in the Patagonian steppe (Coronato, 2010; Tittonell et al, 2021). Sheep pastoralism is central to the economy (up to 95% of their on‐farm income – Villagra et al, 2015) and sheep rearing has become part of their cultural identity (Coronato, 2010).…”

Intégrer la notion de service écosystémique dans les politiques et les pratiques agricoles des pays du Sud

“…Les sept contributions à ce numéro thématique des Cahiers Agricultures (Serpantié et al, 2022), résumées ci-dessous dans l'ordre de leur parution, tentent de répondre à la problématique de ce numéro à partir d'expériences menées sur différents continents : africain (Andriamahefazafy et al, 2020 ;Fournier, 2020 ;Serpantié et al, 2021), asiatique (Castella et Lestrelin, 2021 ;Neang et Méral, 2021) et sud-américain (Resque et al, 2021 ;Tittonnell et al, 2021). Elles étudient les pratiques agricoles au regard des services écosystémiques de différentes manières : en soulignant les relations positives entre certaines pratiques agricoles et les services écosystémiques, ce qui conduit à réhabiliter l'image de l'agriculteur (Resque et al, 2021 ;Neang et Méral, 2021 ;Serpantié et al, 2021 ;Tittonnell et al, 2021) ; en insistant sur l'intérêt de la notion pour mobiliser les agriculteurs dans des démarches pro-environnementales (Andriamahefazafy et al, 2020 ;Resque et al, 2021 ;Castella et Lestrelin, 2021 ;Serpantié et al, 2021) et, enfin, en portant un regard sur les dimensions cognitives (Castella et Lestrelin, 2021 ;Serpantié et al, 2021) et culturelles (Fournier, 2020) de ces relations.…”

“…Cette notion de service écosystémique est apparue opérante pour engager la nécessaire coordination entre acteurs autour d'une gestion concertée des agroécosystèmes, de manière à renforcer les pratiques basées sur la biodiversité en Amazonie brésilienne. Tittonnell et al (2021) utilisent le concept de service écosystémique pour réhabiliter les systèmes d'élevage intensifs de Patagonie face aux critiques sur leur impact environnemental négatif, notamment en relation avec le réchauffement climatique, la désertification et la dégradation des sols. Ils soutiennent que les systèmes pastoraux fournissent un large éventail de services écosystémiques qui peuvent surpasser leur impact négatif sur l'environnement.…”