Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Ecosystem subsidies to Swedish agricultural consumption, industrial intensification and trade 1962-1994
Stockholm University, Stockholm Resilience Centre.
Stockholm University, Stockholm Resilience Centre.
2005 (English)In: Ecosystems (New York. Print), ISSN 1432-9840, E-ISSN 1435-0629, Vol. 8, 512-528 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Analysis of food consumption and agricultural production trends in Sweden has focused on domestic food production levels and yields, over looking human dependence on ecosystem support. We estimate the ecosystem areas appropriated (ArEAs) for agricultural production (crop and animal feed production and grazing in arable land and marine production for fishmeal used in ani mal feed) to satisfy Swedish food consumption needs from 1962 to 1994. The total agroecosystem areas worldwide supporting Swedish food con sumption (that is, domestic production less ex ports plus imports) have declined by almost one third since the 1960s as a result of consumption changes and agricultural intensification. By 1994, Swedish consumption of domestic food crops was halved and consumers relied on agricultural areas outside Sweden to satisfy more than a third (35%) of food consumption needs. Surprisingly, 74% of manufactured animal feed ArEAs were from im ported inputs. Moreover, marine ArEAs equal to 12% of the total appropriated areas were needed to support fishmeal usage in animal feed. The results show that domestic agricultural areas do not support Swedish food consumption and that the bulk of manufactured feed used in animal products' production in Sweden is supplied by ecosystems of other nations. These are hidden subsidies of nature, not explicit in Swedish na tional agricultural policy. Sweden must recognize its high level of dependence on the capacity of ecosystems of other nations to supply its food needs. Ignorance of ecosystem support may in crease vulnerability.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer , 2005. Vol. 8, 512-528 p.
Keyword [en]
agriculture; food consumption; agricultural intensification; ecosystem performance; vulnerability; ecological footprint.
National Category
Agricultural Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-23304DOI: 10.1007/s10021-005-0035-4OAI: diva2:191266
Part of urn:nbn:se:su:diva-232Available from: 2004-09-09 Created: 2004-09-09 Last updated: 2011-01-14Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Global trade, food production and ecosystem support: Making the interactions visible
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Global trade, food production and ecosystem support: Making the interactions visible
2004 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Modern food production is a complex, globalized system in which what we eat and how it is produced are increasingly disconnected. This thesis examines some of the ways in which global trade has changed the mix of inputs to food and feed, and how this affects food security and our perceptions of sustainability. One useful indicator of the ecological impact of trade in food and feed products is the Appropriated Ecosystem Areas (ArEAs), which estimates the terrestrial and aquatic areas needed to produce all the inputs to particular products.

The method is introduced in Paper I and used to calculate and track changes in imported subsidies to Swedish agriculture over the period 1962-1994. In 1994, Swedish consumers needed agricultural areas outside their national borders to satisfy more than a third of their food consumption needs. The method is then applied to Swedish meat production in Paper II to show that the term “Made in Sweden” is often a misnomer. In 1999, almost 80% of manufactured feed for Swedish pigs, cattle and chickens was dependent on imported inputs, mainly from Europe, Southeast Asia and South America. Paper III examines ecosystem subsidies to intensive aquaculture in two nations: shrimp production in Thailand and salmon production in Norway. In both countries, aquaculture was shown to rely increasingly on imported subsidies. The rapid expansion of aquaculture turned these countries from fishmeal net exporters to fishmeal net importers, increasingly using inputs from the Southeastern Pacific Ocean.

As the examined agricultural and aquacultural production systems became globalized, levels of dependence on other nations’ ecosystems, the number of external supply sources, and the distance to these sources steadily increased. Dependence on other nations is not problematic, as long as we are able to acknowledge these links and sustainably manage resources both at home and abroad. However, ecosystem subsidies are seldom recognized or made explicit in national policy or economic accounts. Economic systems are generally not designed to receive feedbacks when the status of remote ecosystems changes, much less to respond in an ecologically sensitive manner. Papers IV and V discuss the problem of “masking” of the true environmental costs of production for trade. One of our conclusions is that, while the ArEAs approach is a useful tool for illuminating environmentally-based subsidies in the policy arena, it does not reflect all of the costs. Current agricultural and aquacultural production methods have generated substantial increases in production levels, but if policy continues to support the focus on yield and production increases alone, taking the work of ecosystems for granted, vulnerability can result. Thus, a challenge is to develop a set of complementary tools that can be used in economic accounting at national and international scales that address ecosystem support and performance.

We conclude that future resilience in food production systems will require more explicit links between consumers and the work of supporting ecosystems, locally and in other regions of the world, and that food security planning will require active management of the capacity of all involved ecosystems to sustain food production.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Institutionen för systemekologi, 2004. 28 p.
global trade, food production, ecosystem support, resilience, agriculture, ecosystem performance, food consumption, ecological footprint, indicators, aquaculture, agricultural intensification, fishmeal, vulnerability, Sweden, animal feed, critical natural capital
National Category
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-232 (URN)91-7265-923-8 (ISBN)
Public defence
2004-10-01, De Geersalen, Geovetenskapens hus, Svante Arrhenius väg 8 C, Stockholm, 13:00
Available from: 2004-09-09 Created: 2004-09-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Deutsch, LisaFolke, Carl
By organisation
Stockholm Resilience Centre
In the same journal
Ecosystems (New York. Print)
Agricultural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 375 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link