The Water Footprint of Primary and Secondary Processing of Beef from Different Cattle Breeds: A Value Fraction Allocation Model
The high water intake and wastewater discharge of slaughterhouses have been a concern for many years. One neglected factor in previous research is allocating the water footprint (WF) to beef production’s different products and by-products. The objective of this article was to estimate the WF of diff...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
MDPI AG
2021-06-01
|
Series: | Sustainability |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6914 |
id |
doaj-a284c3e3644d4bfd8c5d547109b101c4 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-a284c3e3644d4bfd8c5d547109b101c42021-07-01T00:34:47ZengMDPI AGSustainability2071-10502021-06-01136914691410.3390/su13126914The Water Footprint of Primary and Secondary Processing of Beef from Different Cattle Breeds: A Value Fraction Allocation ModelFrikkie Alberts Maré0Henry Jordaan1Department of Agricultural Economics, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein 9301, South AfricaDepartment of Agricultural Economics, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein 9301, South AfricaThe high water intake and wastewater discharge of slaughterhouses have been a concern for many years. One neglected factor in previous research is allocating the water footprint (WF) to beef production’s different products and by-products. The objective of this article was to estimate the WF of different cattle breeds at a slaughterhouse and cutting plant and allocate it according to the different cuts (products) and by-products of beef based on the value fraction of each. The results indicated a negative relationship between the carcass weight and the processing WF when the different breeds were compared. Regarding a specific cut of beef, a kilogram of rib eye from the heaviest breed had a processing WF of 614.57 L/kg, compared to the 919.91 L/kg for the rib eye of the lightest breed. A comparison of the different cuts indicated that high-value cuts had higher WFs than low-value cuts. The difference between a kilogram of rib eye and flank was 426.26 L/kg for the heaviest breed and 637.86 L/kg for the lightest breed. An option to reduce the processing WF of beef is to lessen the WF by slaughtering heavier animals. This will require no extra investment from the slaughterhouse. At the same time, the returns should increase as the average production inputs per kilogram of output (carcass) should reduce, as the slaughterhouse will process more kilograms.https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6914water footprintbeef processingslaughterhousecattle breedsbottom-up approachvalue fraction allocation |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Frikkie Alberts Maré Henry Jordaan |
spellingShingle |
Frikkie Alberts Maré Henry Jordaan The Water Footprint of Primary and Secondary Processing of Beef from Different Cattle Breeds: A Value Fraction Allocation Model Sustainability water footprint beef processing slaughterhouse cattle breeds bottom-up approach value fraction allocation |
author_facet |
Frikkie Alberts Maré Henry Jordaan |
author_sort |
Frikkie Alberts Maré |
title |
The Water Footprint of Primary and Secondary Processing of Beef from Different Cattle Breeds: A Value Fraction Allocation Model |
title_short |
The Water Footprint of Primary and Secondary Processing of Beef from Different Cattle Breeds: A Value Fraction Allocation Model |
title_full |
The Water Footprint of Primary and Secondary Processing of Beef from Different Cattle Breeds: A Value Fraction Allocation Model |
title_fullStr |
The Water Footprint of Primary and Secondary Processing of Beef from Different Cattle Breeds: A Value Fraction Allocation Model |
title_full_unstemmed |
The Water Footprint of Primary and Secondary Processing of Beef from Different Cattle Breeds: A Value Fraction Allocation Model |
title_sort |
water footprint of primary and secondary processing of beef from different cattle breeds: a value fraction allocation model |
publisher |
MDPI AG |
series |
Sustainability |
issn |
2071-1050 |
publishDate |
2021-06-01 |
description |
The high water intake and wastewater discharge of slaughterhouses have been a concern for many years. One neglected factor in previous research is allocating the water footprint (WF) to beef production’s different products and by-products. The objective of this article was to estimate the WF of different cattle breeds at a slaughterhouse and cutting plant and allocate it according to the different cuts (products) and by-products of beef based on the value fraction of each. The results indicated a negative relationship between the carcass weight and the processing WF when the different breeds were compared. Regarding a specific cut of beef, a kilogram of rib eye from the heaviest breed had a processing WF of 614.57 L/kg, compared to the 919.91 L/kg for the rib eye of the lightest breed. A comparison of the different cuts indicated that high-value cuts had higher WFs than low-value cuts. The difference between a kilogram of rib eye and flank was 426.26 L/kg for the heaviest breed and 637.86 L/kg for the lightest breed. An option to reduce the processing WF of beef is to lessen the WF by slaughtering heavier animals. This will require no extra investment from the slaughterhouse. At the same time, the returns should increase as the average production inputs per kilogram of output (carcass) should reduce, as the slaughterhouse will process more kilograms. |
topic |
water footprint beef processing slaughterhouse cattle breeds bottom-up approach value fraction allocation |
url |
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6914 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT frikkiealbertsmare thewaterfootprintofprimaryandsecondaryprocessingofbeeffromdifferentcattlebreedsavaluefractionallocationmodel AT henryjordaan thewaterfootprintofprimaryandsecondaryprocessingofbeeffromdifferentcattlebreedsavaluefractionallocationmodel AT frikkiealbertsmare waterfootprintofprimaryandsecondaryprocessingofbeeffromdifferentcattlebreedsavaluefractionallocationmodel AT henryjordaan waterfootprintofprimaryandsecondaryprocessingofbeeffromdifferentcattlebreedsavaluefractionallocationmodel |
_version_ |
1721348198205751296 |