IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v144y2016icp33-45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic assessment of conservation agriculture options in mixed crop-livestock systems in Brazil using farm modelling

Author

Listed:
  • Alary, V.
  • Corbeels, M.
  • Affholder, F.
  • Alvarez, S.
  • Soria, A.
  • Valadares Xavier, J.H.
  • da Silva, F.A.M.
  • Scopel, E.

Abstract

Direct seeding mulch-based cropping (DMC) systems are often considered as an efficient way of combining ecological sustainability and economic viability while maintaining or increasing agricultural productivity. This paper describes a modelling analysis of the functioning of family farms in rural settlements of the agrarian reform in the Cerrados of Brazil. The aim was to assess the impact of the introduction of DMC systems with and without cover crops on crop-livestock management and net household income. A bio-economic farm model based on optimization of a utility function under multiple constraints was developed, capturing the interactions between livestock activities and the introduction of DMC systems. The model was run for six farms representing three farm types in the study area: 1) subsistence-oriented mixed crop-livestock farms; 2) market-oriented dairy farms; and 3) mixed crop-livestock farms, oriented to meat marketing. The following maize-based DMC systems were evaluated: a DMC system with mulch from residues of the previous maize crop and no cover crop, and two DMC systems with a fodder species, Brachiaria brizanta or Cajanus cajan, as cover crop. The simulated adoptability of DMC systems by farmers of the assentamentos depended to a large extent on the yields and feed quality of the fodder species. The modelling results suggested that DMC with C. cajan as cover crop was the best suitable option for all simulated farm types. This was mainly explained by its high feed value (expressed in crude protein content). Furthermore, in the process of intensification and specialization in dairy production, farmers were likely to shift from using maize for pig husbandry to feeding it to the dairy cows. The introduction of cover crops in the farm systems was a source of additional animal feed during the dry season that was cheaper than the purchase of feed concentrates, when the size of the dairy herd did not exceed a certain threshold.

Suggested Citation

  • Alary, V. & Corbeels, M. & Affholder, F. & Alvarez, S. & Soria, A. & Valadares Xavier, J.H. & da Silva, F.A.M. & Scopel, E., 2016. "Economic assessment of conservation agriculture options in mixed crop-livestock systems in Brazil using farm modelling," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 33-45.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:144:y:2016:i:c:p:33-45
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2016.01.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X16300178
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.01.008?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. Deybe, D., 1998. "Can agricultural sector models be a tool for policy analysis? An application for the case of Burkina Faso," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 367-380, November.
    2. Alary, V. & Nefzaoui, A. & Jemaa, M. Ben, 2007. "Promoting the adoption of natural resource management technology in arid and semi-arid areas: Modelling the impact of spineless cactus in alley cropping in Central Tunisia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 573-585, May.
    3. Thornton, P. K. & Herrero, M., 2001. "Integrated crop-livestock simulation models for scenario analysis and impact assessment," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 70(2-3), pages 581-602.
    4. Barbier, Bruno, 1998. "Induced innovation and land degradation: Results from a bioeconomic model of a village in West Africa," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 19(1-2), pages 15-25, September.
    5. Janssen, Sander & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2007. "Assessing farm innovations and responses to policies: A review of bio-economic farm models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 622-636, June.
    6. Le Gal, P.-Y. & Dugué, P. & Faure, G. & Novak, S., 2011. "How does research address the design of innovative agricultural production systems at the farm level? A review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(9), pages 714-728.
    7. van Ittersum, Martin K. & Ewert, Frank & Heckelei, Thomas & Wery, Jacques & Alkan Olsson, Johanna & Andersen, Erling & Bezlepkina, Irina & Brouwer, Floor & Donatelli, Marcello & Flichman, Guillermo & , 2008. "Integrated assessment of agricultural systems - A component-based framework for the European Union (SEAMLESS)," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 96(1-3), pages 150-165, March.
    8. Bruno Barbier, 1998. "Induced innovation and land degradation: Results from a bioeconomic model of a village in West Africa," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 19(1-2), pages 15-25, September.
    9. Affholder, François & Jourdain, Damien & Quang, Dang Dinh & Tuong, To Phuc & Morize, Marion & Ricome, Aymeric, 2010. "Constraints to farmers' adoption of direct-seeding mulch-based cropping systems: A farm scale modeling approach applied to the mountainous slopes of Vietnam," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 51-62, January.
    10. Loren W. Tauer, 1983. "Target MOTAD," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 65(3), pages 606-610.
    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. Rivas, José & Perea, José Manuel & De-Pablos-Heredero, Carmen & Angon, Elena & Barba, Cecilio & García, Antón, 2019. "Canonical correlation of technological innovation and performance in sheep's dairy farms: Selection of a set of indicators," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    2. Epper, C.A. & Paul, B. & Burra, D. & Phengsavanh, P. & Ritzema, R. & Syfongxay, C. & Groot, J.C.J. & Six, J. & Frossard, E. & Oberson, A. & Douxchamps, S., 2020. "Nutrient flows and intensification options for smallholder farmers of the Lao uplands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    3. Paul, B.K. & Epper, C.A. & Tschopp, D.J. & Long, C.T.M. & Tungani, V. & Burra, D. & Hok, L. & Phengsavanh, P. & Douxchamps, S., 2022. "Crop-livestock integration provides opportunities to mitigate environmental trade-offs in transitioning smallholder agricultural systems of the Greater Mekong Subregion," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    4. Ditzler, Lenora & Klerkx, Laurens & Chan-Dentoni, Jacqueline & Posthumus, Helena & Krupnik, Timothy J. & Ridaura, Santiago López & Andersson, Jens A. & Baudron, Frédéric & Groot, Jeroen C.J., 2018. "Affordances of agricultural systems analysis tools: A review and framework to enhance tool design and implementation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 20-30.
    5. Lairez, Juliette & Jourdain, Damien & Lopez-Ridaura, Santiago & Syfongxay, Chanthaly & Affholder, François, 2023. "Multicriteria assessment of alternative cropping systems at farm level. A case with maize on family farms of South East Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    6. Shirsath, Paresh B. & Aggarwal, P.K. & Thornton, P.K. & Dunnett, A., 2017. "Prioritizing climate-smart agricultural land use options at a regional scale," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 174-183.
    7. Luz Maria Castro & Fabian Härtl & Santiago Ochoa & Baltazar Calvas & Leonardo Izquierdo & Thomas Knoke, 2018. "Integrated bio-economic models as tools to support land-use decision making: a review of potential and limitations," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 183-211, July.

    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. Affholder, François & Jourdain, Damien & Quang, Dang Dinh & Tuong, To Phuc & Morize, Marion & Ricome, Aymeric, 2010. "Constraints to farmers' adoption of direct-seeding mulch-based cropping systems: A farm scale modeling approach applied to the mountainous slopes of Vietnam," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 51-62, January.
    2. Ditzler, Lenora & Komarek, Adam M. & Chiang, Tsai-Wei & Alvarez, Stéphanie & Chatterjee, Shantonu Abe & Timler, Carl & Raneri, Jessica E. & Carmona, Natalia Estrada & Kennedy, Gina & Groot, Jeroen C.J, 2019. "A model to examine farm household trade-offs and synergies with an application to smallholders in Vietnam," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 49-63.
    3. Schreefel, L. & de Boer, I.J.M. & Timler, C.J. & Groot, J.C.J. & Zwetsloot, M.J. & Creamer, R.E. & Schrijver, A. Pas & van Zanten, H.H.E. & Schulte, R.P.O., 2022. "How to make regenerative practices work on the farm: A modelling framework," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    4. Adelhart Toorop, Roos & Ceccarelli, Viviana & Bijarniya, Deepak & Jat, Mangi Lal & Jat, Raj Kumar & Lopez-Ridaura, Santiago & Groot, Jeroen C.J., 2020. "Using a positive deviance approach to inform farming systems redesign: A case study from Bihar, India," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    5. Alary, V. & Nefzaoui, A. & Jemaa, M. Ben, 2007. "Promoting the adoption of natural resource management technology in arid and semi-arid areas: Modelling the impact of spineless cactus in alley cropping in Central Tunisia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 573-585, May.
    6. Mahamadou Belem & Sansa Youl & Raphael Manlay & Bruno Barbier & Christophe Lepage, 2000. "MIROT: A multi-Agent System Model for the Simulation of the Dynamics of Carbon Resources of West-African Village Territories," Regional and Urban Modeling 283600008, EcoMod.
    7. Berkhout, E.D. & Schipper, R.A. & Van Keulen, H. & Coulibaly, O., 2011. "Heterogeneity in farmers' production decisions and its impact on soil nutrient use: Results and implications from northern Nigeria," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 63-74, January.
    8. Vayssières, Jonathan & Vigne, Mathieu & Alary, Véronique & Lecomte, Philippe, 2011. "Integrated participatory modelling of actual farms to support policy making on sustainable intensification," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 146-161, February.
    9. S. Nedumaran & Beleke Shiferaw & M. Bantilan & K. Palanisami & Suhas Wani, 2014. "Bioeconomic modeling of farm household decisions for ex-ante impact assessment of integrated watershed development programs in semi-arid India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 257-286, April.
    10. Ditzler, Lenora & Klerkx, Laurens & Chan-Dentoni, Jacqueline & Posthumus, Helena & Krupnik, Timothy J. & Ridaura, Santiago López & Andersson, Jens A. & Baudron, Frédéric & Groot, Jeroen C.J., 2018. "Affordances of agricultural systems analysis tools: A review and framework to enhance tool design and implementation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 20-30.
    11. Barbier, Bruno & Bergeron, Gilles, 2001. "Natural resource management in the hillsides of Honduras: bioeconomic modeling at the micro-watershed level," Research reports 123, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    12. Viaggi, Davide & Raggi, Meri & Gomez y Paloma, Sergio, 2011. "Farm-household investment behaviour and the CAP decoupling: Methodological issues in assessing policy impacts," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 127-145, January.
    13. Ponsioen, Thomas C. & Hengsdijk, Huib & Wolf, Joost & van Ittersum, Martin K. & Rotter, Reimund P. & Son, Tran Thuc & Laborte, Alice G., 2006. "TechnoGIN, a tool for exploring and evaluating resource use efficiency of cropping systems in East and Southeast Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 80-100, January.
    14. Groot, Jeroen C.J. & Oomen, Gerard J.M. & Rossing, Walter A.H., 2012. "Multi-objective optimization and design of farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 63-77.
    15. Britz, Wolfgang & Ciaian, Pavel & Gocht, Alexander & Kanellopoulos, Argyris & Kremmydas, Dimitrios & Müller, Marc & Petsakos, Athanasios & Reidsma, Pytrik, 2021. "A design for a generic and modular bio-economic farm model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    16. Seebens, Holger, 2008. "One size fits all? Female Headed Households, Income Risk, and Access to Resources," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43609, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Louhichi, Kamel & Flichman, Guillermo & Blanco Fonseca, Maria, 2009. "A generic template for FSSIM," Reports 57463, Wageningen University, SEAMLESS: System for Environmental and Agricultural Modelling; Linking European Science and Society.
    18. Le Gal, P.-Y. & Dugué, P. & Faure, G. & Novak, S., 2011. "How does research address the design of innovative agricultural production systems at the farm level? A review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(9), pages 714-728.
    19. Pant, Laxmi Prasad, 2016. "Paradox of mainstreaming agroecology for regional and rural food security in developing countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 305-316.
    20. Damien Jourdain & Juliette Lairez & Bruno Striffler & François Affholder, 2020. "Farmers’ preference for cropping systems and the development of sustainable intensification: a choice experiment approach," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 101(4), pages 417-437, December.

    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:144:y:2016:i:c:p:33-45. 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.