Összegződnek-e az egyéni törekvések? A cselekvés és az eredmény közötti szakadék problémája (Can individual efforts be aggregated? The problem of the action-impact gap)

A szerző arra a kérdésre keresi a választ, hogyan alakulhat ki látványos szakadék az egyéni cselekvések iránya és azok együttes hatása között. A szándékok és tettek hatását felülírhatja a társadalmi gazdasági tényezőkből adódó tehetetlenség: a kritikus tömeg hiánya, szervezeti-infrastrukturális tényezők, kompenzációs hatások, egymás hatását kioltó cselekvések. A szerző a környezettudatosság és az ökológiai lábnyom példáján - ezerfős reprezentatív felmérésre alapozva - mutatja be, hogy az önkéntességre alapozó megközelítés sokszor túlbecsüli a fogyasztó - társadalmi-gazdasági tényezők által korlátozott - lehetőségeit és szuverenitását. _____ Behaviour impact gaps are demonstrably present in everyday life. It is increasingly found that environmental awareness in individuals fails to lead to reductions in the ecological footprint. Intensive agricultural practice reduces biodiversity in the EU even in areas where massive agri-environmental grant schemes are available and applied. Labour market training programmes do not necessarily facilitate job-finding for underprivileged segments of the society. So individual efforts may not add up or induce the expected effect. This outcome appears even for programmes that are successful in attaining the required behavioural change in a target group. The impact of attitudes and individual acts may be wiped out by structural and economic lock-ins such as trade-offs made for the gains, lack of a critical mass of actions, infrastructural deficiencies, or interfering acts of economic actors. The discrepancy between environmental awareness and ecological footprint is used to point out how awareness-raising programmes may miss their targets by overestimating the sovereignty and capabilities of consumers. Consumers are unwillingly locked into unsustainable practices and cannot be moved from that position unless economic and structural premises are also changed.

Modifying the yield factor based on more efficient use of fertilizer — The environmental impacts of intensive and extensive agricultural practices

The aim of this article is to draw attention to calculations on the environmental effects of agriculture and to the definition of marginal agricultural yield. When calculating the environmental impacts of agricultural activities, the real environmental load generated by agriculture is not revealed properly through ecological footprint indicators, as the type of agricultural farming (thus the nature of the pollution it creates) is not incorporated in the calculation. It is commonly known that extensive farming uses relatively small amounts of labor and capital. It produces a lower yield per unit of land and thus requires more land than intensive farming practices to produce similar yields, so it has a larger crop and grazing footprint. However, intensive farms, to achieve higher yields, apply fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, etc., and cultivation and harvesting are often mechanized. In this study, the focus is on highlighting the differences in the environmental impacts of extensive and intensive farming practices through a statistical analysis of the factors determining agricultural yield. A marginal function is constructed for the relation between chemical fertilizer use and yield per unit fertilizer input. Furthermore, a proposal is presented for how calculation of the yield factor could possibly be improved. The yield factor used in the calculation of biocapacity is not the marginal yield for a given area, but is calculated from the real and actual yields, and this way biocapacity and the ecological footprint for cropland are equivalent. Calculations for cropland biocapacity do not show the area needed for sustainable production, but rather the actual land area used for agricultural production. The proposal the authors present is a modification of the yield factor and also the changed biocapacity is calculated. The results of statistical analyses reveal the need for a clarification of the methodology for calculating marginal yield, which could clearly contribute to assessing the real environmental impacts of agriculture.

Modifying the yield factor based on more efficient use of fertilizer — The environmental impacts of intensive and extensive agricultural practices

The aim of this article is to draw attention to calculations on the environmental effects of agriculture and to the definition of marginal agricultural yield. When calculating the environmental impacts of agricultural activities, the real environmental load generated by agriculture is not revealed properly through ecological footprint indicators, as the type of agricultural farming (thus the nature of the pollution it creates) is not incorporated in the calculation. It is commonly known that extensive farming uses relatively small amounts of labor and capital. It produces a lower yield per unit of land and thus requires more land than intensive farming practices to produce similar yields, so it has a larger crop and grazing footprint. However, intensive farms, to achieve higher yields, apply fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, etc., and cultivation and harvesting are often mechanized. In this study, the focus is on highlighting the differences in the environmental impacts of extensive and intensive farming practices through a statistical analysis of the factors determining agricultural yield. A marginal function is constructed for the relation between chemical fertilizer use and yield per unit fertilizer input. Furthermore, a proposal is presented for how calculation of the yield factor could possibly be improved. The yield factor used in the calculation of biocapacity is not the marginal yield for a given area, but is calculated from the real and actual yields, and this way biocapacity and the ecological footprint for cropland are equivalent. Calculations for cropland biocapacity do not show the area needed for sustainable production, but rather the actual land area used for agricultural production. The proposal the authors present is a modification of the yield factor and also the changed biocapacity is calculated. The results of statistical analyses reveal the need for a clarification of the methodology for calculating marginal yield, which could clearly contribute to assessing the real environmental impacts of agriculture.