SWS Academic Research eLibraryEarth & Planetary Sciences

Scholarly record

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF STOCKING DENSITY ON LIVESTOCK FARMS IN THE BALTIC STATES

Inese Muceniece, Arturs Praulins, Inga Veinberga-Gravleja

First published: 2026DOI pendingView metrics

Abstract

Nowadays effective grazing management plays a critical role in sustaining biodiversity, maintaining soil quality and protecting natural habitats, thereby supporting ecological balance. The present study aims to explore stocking density trends on livestock farms with different economic size in the Baltic States over the years 2004 - 2023 and contrast them with changes in the EU stocking density. Stocking density is measured in livestock units per hectare of forage utilized agricultural area and acts as a basic evaluative indicator of environmentally sustainable practices. The time series analysis draws on statistical data obtained from the Farm Sustainability Data Network (FSDN). Although the stocking density had increased on the Baltic livestock farms since 2004, it still remained among the lowest across the EU Member States. In Latvia, stocking density constituted 66 % to 92 % and in Estonia – 74 % to 110 % of the Lithuanian level. Similar to the EU, stocking density increased with the economic size of the Baltic milk farms. In addition, the larger milk farms were in Estonia, the smaller a difference between their production intensity and stocking density on the EU milk farms of similar economic size was. In contrast, in Latvia and Lithuania this relationship was not linear due to considerable fluctuations of stocking density over the years.

Publication details

Title
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF STOCKING DENSITY ON LIVESTOCK FARMS IN THE BALTIC STATES
Authors
Inese Muceniece, Arturs Praulins, Inga Veinberga-Gravleja
Proceedings
SWS 2026 Conference Preprints
Publisher
STEF92 Technology
Year
2026
Pages
Not available yet
ISSN
1314-2704; 1314-2704
ISBN
Not available yet
Language
en
Publication type
Preprint
References15
  1. Mcsherry M. E., Ritchie M. E. Effects of grazing on grassland soil carbon: A global review. Global Change Biology, vol. 19 / issue 5, pp 1347-1357, 2013. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12144

  2. Bansal S., Sanyal D. et al. Impacts of stocking densities on soil biochemical and microbial properties in a mixed-grass prairie ecosystem at two landscape positions. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, vol. 8, article 1254973, 2024. DOI: 10.3389/fsufs.2024.1254973

  3. Jezierska-Thöle A., Janzen J., Rudnicki R. Agrarian-economic structure of agricultural holdings in Poland and East Germany: Selected elements of comparative analysis. Quaestiones Geographicae, vol 33 / issue 2, pp 87-101, 2014. DOI: 10.2478/quageo-2014-0018

  4. Holechek J. L., Gomez H. et al. Grazing studies: What we've learned. Rangelands, vol. 21 / issue 2, pp 12-16, 1999.

  5. Hart R. H., Ashby M. M. Grazing intensities, vegetation, and heifer gains: 55 years on shortgrass. Journal of Range Management, vol. 51 / issue 4, 392-398, 1998. DOI: 10.2307/4003323

  6. Holechek J. L. Financial returns from different grazing management systems in New Mexico. Rangelands vol. 16 / issue 6, pp 237-240, 1994.

  7. Manley W. A., Hart R. H. et al. Vegetation, cattle, and economic responses to grazing strategies and pressures. Journal of Range Management, vol. 50, pp 638-646, 1997. DOI: 10.2307/4003460

  8. Wilson A. D., MacLeod N. D. Overgrazing: Present or absent? Journal of Range Management, vol. 44 / issue 5, pp 475-482, 1991. DOI: 10.2307/4002748

  9. Holechek J. L., Pieper R. D. et al. Range management: Principles and practices. Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004, ISBN 9780130474759.

  10. Workman J. P. The value of increased forage from improved rangeland condition. Rangelands, vol. 17 / issue 2, pp 46-48, 1995.

  11. Teague R., Kreuter U. Managing grazing to restore soil health, ecosystem function, and ecosystem services. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, vol. 4, article 534187, 2020. DOI: 10.3389/fsufs.2020.534187

  12. Salvati L., Carlucci M. Towards sustainability in agro-forest systems? Grazing intensity, soil degradation and the socioeconomic profile of rural communities in Italy. Ecological Economics, vol. 112, pp 1-13, 2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.02.001

  13. Prieto L. H., Bertiller M. B. et al. Soil enzyme and microbial activities in a grazing ecosystem of Patagonian Monte, Argentina. Geoderma, vol. 162 / issue 3-4, pp 281-287, 2011. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.02.011

  14. Yates C. J., Norton D. A. et al. Grazing effects on plant cover, soil and microclimate in fragmented woodlands in South-Western Australia: Implications for restoration. Austral Ecology. A Journal of Ecology in the Southern Hemisphere, vol. 25 / issue 1, pp 36-47, 2000. DOI: 10.1046/j.1442-9993.2000.01030.x

  15. Zhou G., Zhou X. et al. Grazing intensity significantly affects belowground carbon and nitrogen cycling in grassland ecosystems: A meta-analysis. Global Change Biology, vol. 23 / issue 3, pp 1167-1179, 2017. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.13431

Back to publication list