IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v141y2015icp126-137.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Resource use and benefits of mixed farming approach in arecanut ecosystem in India

Author

Listed:
  • S., Sujatha
  • Bhat, Ravi

Abstract

An eight-year experiment studied the sustainability, profitability, interdependencies and ecosystem services of crop–livestock integration in an arecanut plantation (ABMS) in humid tropics of India during 2007–2014. Arecanut registered similar kernel yields in both sole and intercropped systems in all years. The sole Napier Bajra Hybrid (NBH) recorded significantly higher green fodder yield than intercropped NBH. There was 5–47% yield reduction in intercropped NBH in different plantations over sole NBH on unit area basis. The total standing carbon stocks were significantly higher in arecanut+fodder system (210–228tha−1) than arecanut sole and fodder sole. Total water use was 47 to 50% higher in arecanut sole (2340–3280m3) compared to ABMS (1178–1546m3) per unit area. The contribution of livestock to total outflows was high (82 to 87%) from 2008 to 2014 except in establishment year of dairy unit (54%). On an average, organic waste recycling potential of arecanut+dairy unit was 13.7tha−1 and dairy unit alone contributed to 87% of the manure production. Total nutrient supply from ABMS after recycling to the system was estimated at 218kgN, 51.8kg P and 33kgK that can meet N and P demand of 1.7 and 2.2ha of arecanut, respectively. The farm gate nutrient surplus was five times higher than utilization in ABMS that enables farmers to earn higher profits. The use of hard laterite soil for livestock enterprises like dairy, fishery and fodder cultivation resulted in improved resource use efficiency and profits per unit area per unit time. Dairy was economical under all scenarios due to on-farm fodder availability throughout the year. Our main recommendations are to include livestock components in arecanut ecosystem to adapt to climate change scenario, to provide ecosystem services and to reduce ecological imbalances arising due to continuous cultivation of perennial crop.

Suggested Citation

  • S., Sujatha & Bhat, Ravi, 2015. "Resource use and benefits of mixed farming approach in arecanut ecosystem in India," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 126-137.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:141:y:2015:i:c:p:126-137
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2015.10.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X15300366
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.10.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bhat, Ravi & Sujatha, S. & Balasimha, D., 2007. "Impact of drip fertigation on productivity of arecanut (Areca catechu L.)," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-2), pages 101-111, May.
    2. Thomas, D. & Zerbini, E. & Parthasarathy Rao, P. & Vaidyanathan, A., 2002. "Increasing animal productivity on small mixed farms in South Asia: a systems perspective," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 71(1-2), pages 41-57.
    3. Klapwijk, C.J. & Bucagu, C. & van Wijk, M.T. & Udo, H.M.J. & Vanlauwe, B. & Munyanziza, E. & Giller, K.E., 2014. "The ‘One cow per poor family’ programme: Current and potential fodder availability within smallholder farming systems in southwest Rwanda," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 11-22.
    4. Pacín, Fernando & Oesterheld, Martín, 2014. "In-farm diversity stabilizes return on capital in Argentine agro-ecosystems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 51-59.
    5. Sujatha, S. & Bhat, Ravi, 2010. "Response of vanilla (Vanilla planifolia A.) intercropped in arecanut to irrigation and nutrition in humid tropics of India," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(7), pages 988-994, July.
    6. Delgado, Christopher L. & Rosegrant, Mark W. & Steinfeld, Henning & Ehui, Simeon K. & Courbois, Claude, 1999. "Livestock to 2020: the next food revolution," 2020 vision briefs 61, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Devendra, C. & Thomas, D., 2002. "Crop-animal interactions in mixed farming systems in Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 71(1-2), pages 27-40.
    8. Devendra, C., 2002. "Crop-animal systems in Asia: future perspectives," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 71(1-2), pages 179-186.
    9. Nhan, Dang K. & Phong, Le T. & Verdegem, Marc J.C. & Duong, Le T. & Bosma, Roel H. & Little, David C., 2007. "Integrated freshwater aquaculture, crop and livestock production in the Mekong delta, Vietnam: Determinants and the role of the pond," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 445-458, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shoyama, Kikuko & Kamiyama, Chiho & Morimoto, Junko & Ooba, Makoto & Okuro, Toshiya, 2017. "A review of modeling approaches for ecosystem services assessment in the Asian region," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 316-328.
    2. Paramesh, Venkatesh & Arunachalam, Vadivel & Nath, Arun Jyoti, 2019. "Enhancing ecosystem services and energy use efficiency under organic and conventional nutrient management system to a sustainable arecanut based cropping system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    3. Poonam Kashyap & Ashisa K. Prusty & Azad S. Panwar & Venkatesh Paramesh & Ravisankar Natesan & M. Shamim & Nisha Verma & Phool Chand Jat & Mahendra Pal Singh, 2022. "Achieving Food and Livelihood Security and Enhancing Profitability through an Integrated Farming System Approach: A Case Study from Western Plains of Uttar Pradesh, India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-17, May.
    4. Paramesh, Venkatesh & Parajuli, Ranjan & Chakurkar, E.B. & Sreekanth, G.B. & Kumar, H.B. Chetan & Gokuldas, P.P. & Mahajan, Gopal R. & Manohara, K.K. & Viswanatha, Reddy K. & Ravisankar, N., 2019. "Sustainability, energy budgeting, and life cycle assessment of crop-dairy-fish-poultry mixed farming system for coastal lowlands under humid tropic condition of India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paramesh, Venkatesh & Parajuli, Ranjan & Chakurkar, E.B. & Sreekanth, G.B. & Kumar, H.B. Chetan & Gokuldas, P.P. & Mahajan, Gopal R. & Manohara, K.K. & Viswanatha, Reddy K. & Ravisankar, N., 2019. "Sustainability, energy budgeting, and life cycle assessment of crop-dairy-fish-poultry mixed farming system for coastal lowlands under humid tropic condition of India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    2. Tristan Le Cotty & Bruno Dorin, 2012. "A global foresight on food crop needs for livestock," Post-Print hal-00800715, HAL.
    3. Olson, Kent & Gauto, Victor & Erenstein, Olaf & Teufel, Nils & Swain, Braja & Tui, Sabine Homann-Kee & Duncan, Alan, 2021. "Estimating Farmers’ Internal Value of Crop Residues in Smallholder Crop-Livestock Systems: A South Asia Case Study," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315188, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Yu, Wusheng & Hertel, Thomas W. & Preckel, Paul V. & Eales, James S., 2004. "Projecting world food demand using alternative demand systems," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 99-129, January.
    5. Shikuku, Kelvin M. & Valdivia, Roberto O. & Paul, Birthe K. & Mwongera, Caroline & Winowiecki, Leigh & Läderach, Peter & Herrero, Mario & Silvestri, Silvia, 2017. "Prioritizing climate-smart livestock technologies in rural Tanzania: A minimum data approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 204-216.
    6. Leakey, Roger & Kranjac-Berisavljevic, Gordana & Caron, Patrick & Craufurd, Peter & Martin, Adrienne M. & McDonald, Andy & Abedini, Walter & Afiff, Suraya & Bakurin, Ndey & Bass, Steve & Hilbeck, Ange, 2009. "Impacts of AKST on development and sustainability goals," Book Chapters,, International Water Management Institute.
    7. Sotsha, Kayalethu & Fakudze, Bhekiwe & Myeki, Lindikaya & Ngqangweni, Simphiwe & Nyhodo, Bonani & Ngetu, Xolile & Mazibuko, Ndumiso & Lubinga, H. Moses & Khoza, Thulisile & Ntshangase, Thandeka & Mmbe, 2017. "Factors influencing communal livestock farmers' participation into the National Red Meat Development Programme (NRMDP) in South Africa: the case of the Eastern Cape Province," NAMC Publications 263686, National Agricultural Marketing Council.
    8. Ngoc-Ninh Ho & Truong Lam Do & Dinh-Thao Tran & Trung Thanh Nguyen, 2022. "Indigenous pig production and welfare of ultra-poor ethnic minority households in the Northern mountains of Vietnam," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 156-179, January.
    9. Nesar Ahmed & Shirley Thompson & Giovanni M. Turchini, 2020. "Organic aquaculture productivity, environmental sustainability, and food security: insights from organic agriculture," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(6), pages 1253-1267, December.
    10. Poot-López, Gaspar Román & Hernández, Juan M. & Gasca-Leyva, Eucario, 2010. "Input management in integrated agriculture-aquaculture systems in Yucatan: Tree spinach leaves as a dietary supplement in tilapia culture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 98-104, February.
    11. Griffith, Garry R. & Parnell, Peter F. & McKiernan, William A., 2005. "The Economic, Environmental and Social Benefits to NSW from Investment in the CRC for Beef Genetics Technologies," Research Reports 42654, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries Research Economists.
    12. Bosire, Caroline K. & Krol, Maarten S. & Mekonnen, Mesfin M. & Ogutu, Joseph O. & de Leeuw, Jan & Lannerstad, Mats & Hoekstra, Arjen Y., 2016. "Meat and milk production scenarios and the associated land footprint in Kenya," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 64-75.
    13. Ahuja, Vinod & McConnell, Kenneth E. & Umali-Deininger, Dina & de Haan, Cornelis, 2003. "Are the Poor Willing to Pay for Livestock Services? Evidence from Rural India," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 58(01), March.
    14. Gamba, Paul, 2005. "Urban Domestic Consumption Patterns for Meat: Trends and Policy Implications," Working Papers 202626, Egerton University, Tegemeo Institute of Agricultural Policy and Development.
    15. Harkness, Caroline & Areal, Francisco J. & Semenov, Mikhail A. & Senapati, Nimai & Shield, Ian F. & Bishop, Jacob, 2023. "Towards stability of food production and farm income in a variable climate," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    16. Vercoe, John E., 2003. "The Livestock Revolution: A Pathway out of Poverty?," 2003: The Livestock Revolution: A Pathway from Poverty?, 13 August 2003 124023, Crawford Fund.
    17. Waldron, Scott A. & Brown, Colin G. & Longworth, John W., 2003. "Transforming Lives with Livestock-based Agribusiness," 2003: The Livestock Revolution: A Pathway from Poverty?, 13 August 2003 124014, Crawford Fund.
    18. Bossio, Deborah & Noble, Andrew D. & Aloysius, Noel & Pretty, J. & Penning de Vries, F., 2008. "Ecosystem benefits of \u2018bright\u2019 spots," IWMI Books, Reports H041603, International Water Management Institute.
    19. Prabhat Khanal & Rajan Dhakal & Tanka Khanal & Deepak Pandey & Naba Raj Devkota & Mette Olaf Nielsen, 2022. "Sustainable Livestock Production in Nepal: A Focus on Animal Nutrition Strategies," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, May.
    20. McDonald, C.K. & MacLeod, N.D. & Lisson, S. & Corfield, J.P., 2019. "The Integrated Analysis Tool (IAT) – A model for the evaluation of crop-livestock and socio-economic interventions in smallholder farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:141:y:2015:i:c:p:126-137. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.