Laurence G Smith

Dr. Laurence G Smith

Royal Agricultural University, Cirencester, Gloucestershire GL7 6JS, UK
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

14Years (2013-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
22 October 2019 in Nature Communications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LSLaurence Smith
Laurence Smith
GKGuy J. D. Kirk
Guy J. D. Kirk
PJPhilip Jones
Philip Jones
AWAdrian G. Williams
Adrian G. Williams
Agriculture is a major contributor to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and must feature in efforts to reduce emissions. Organic farming might contribute to this through decreased use of farm inputs and increased soil carbon sequestration, but it might also exacerbate emissions through greater food production elsewhere to make up for lower organic yields. To date there has been no rigorous assessment of this potential at national scales. Here we assess the consequences for net GHG emissions of a 100% shift to organic food production in England and Wales using life-cycle assessment. We predict major shortfalls in production of most agricultural products against a conventional baseline. Direct GHG emissions are reduced with organic farming, but when increased overseas land use to compensate for shortfalls in domestic supply are factored in, net emissions are greater. Enhanced soil carbon sequestration could offset only a small part of the higher overseas emissions.

13 May 2021 in Nature Food
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PBPietro Barbieri
Pietro Barbieri
SPSylvain Pellerin
Sylvain Pellerin
VSVerena Seufert
Verena Seufert
LSLaurence Smith
Laurence Smith
NRNavin Ramankutty
Navin Ramankutty
TNThomas Nesme
Thomas Nesme

22 January 2014 in Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LSLaurence Smith
Laurence Smith
AWAdrian G. Williams
Adrian G. Williams
BPBruce. D. Pearce
Bruce. D. Pearce
Growing populations and a constrained fossil-manufactured energy supply present a major challenge for society and there is a real need to develop forms of agriculture that are less dependent on finite energy sources. It has been suggested that organic agriculture can provide a more energy efficient approach due to its focus on sustainable production methods. This review has investigated the extent to which this is true for a range of farming systems. Data from about 50 studies were reviewed with results suggesting that organic farming performs better than conventional for nearly all crop types when energy use is expressed on a unit of area basis. Results are more variable per unit of product due to the lower yield for most organic crops. For livestock, ruminant production systems tend to be more energy efficient under organic management due to the production of forage in grass–clover leys. Conversely, organic poultry tend to perform worse in terms of energy use as a result of higher feed conversion ratios and mortality rates compared to conventional fully housed or free-range systems. With regard to energy sources, there is some evidence that organic farms use more renewable energy and have less of an impact on natural ecosystems. Human energy requirements on organic farms are also higher as a result of greater system diversity and manual weed control. Overall this review has found that most organic farming systems are more energy efficient than their conventional counterparts, although there are some notable exceptions.

1 April 2019 in Journal of Cleaner Production
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MKMarie Trydeman Knudsen
Marie Trydeman Knudsen
TDTeodora Dorca-Preda
Teodora Dorca-Preda
SDSylvestre Njakou Djomo
Sylvestre Njakou Djomo
NPNancy Peña
Nancy Peña
SPSusanne Padel
Susanne Padel
JHJohn E. Hermansen
John E. Hermansen

16 March 2016 in Sustainability
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Christian SchaderChristian Schader
Christian Schader
LBLukas Baumgart
Lukas Baumgart
JLJan Landert
Jan Landert
AMAdrian Muller
Adrian Muller
BSBrian Ssebunya
Brian Ssebunya
MSMatthias Stolze
Matthias Stolze
When trying to optimize the sustainability performance of farms and farming systems, a consideration of trade-offs and synergies between different themes and dimensions is required. The aim of this paper is to perform a systematic analysis of trade-offs and synergies across all dimensions and themes. To achieve this aim we used the Sustainability Monitoring and Assessment Routine (SMART)-Farm Tool which operationalizes the Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture Systems (SAFA) Guidelines by defining science-based indicator sets and assessment procedures. It identifies the degree of goal achievement with respect to the 58 themes defined in the SAFA Guidelines using an impact matrix that defines 327 indicators and 1769 relations between sustainability themes and indicators. We illustrate how the SMART-Farm Tool can be successfully applied to assess the sustainability performance of farms of different types and in different geographic regions. Our analysis revealed important synergies between themes within a sustainability dimension and across dimensions. We found major trade-offs within the environmental dimension and between the environmental and economic dimension. The trade-offs within the environmental dimension were even larger than the trade-offs with other dimensions. The study also underlines the importance of the governance dimension with regard to achieving a good level of performance in the other dimensions.

6 July 2020 in Sustainability
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LLLisa Lehmann
Lisa Lehmann
JSJo Smith
Jo Smith
SWSally Westaway
Sally Westaway
Andrea PisanelliAndrea Pisanelli
Andrea Pisanelli
GRGiuseppe Russo
Giuseppe Russo
BGBhim Bahadur Ghaley
Bhim Bahadur Ghaley
Agroforestry systems have multifunctional roles in enhancing agronomic productivity, co-production of diversity of food and non-food products and provision of ecosystem services. The knowledge of the performance of agroforestry systems compared with monoculture is scarce and scattered. Hence, the objective of the study was to analyze the agronomic productivity and economic viability of diverse agroforestry systems in Europe. A network of five agroforestry systems integrating arable crops, livestock and biomass trees was investigated to assess the range of agricultural products in each agroforestry system. Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) was used to measure the agronomic productivity, whereas gross margin was used as an indicator for economic viability assessment. LER values ranged from 1.36–2.00, indicating that agroforestry systems were more productive by 36–100% compared to monocultures. Agroforestry gross margin was lower in Denmark (€112 ha−1 year−1) compared to United Kingdom (€5083 ha−1 year−1) and the crop component yielded higher returns compared to negative returns from the tree component in agroforestry. Hence, the study provided robust field-based evidence on agronomic productivity and economic viability assessment of agroforestry systems in diverse contexts for informed decision making by land managers, advisory services, farmers and policymakers.