Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Slideshows for you(20)

Similar to Building SI on a Rock: Is a systems perspective essential for integrated crop livestock systems?(20)

Advertisement
Advertisement

Building SI on a Rock: Is a systems perspective essential for integrated crop livestock systems?

  1. Building SI on a Rock: Is a Systems Perspective Essential for Integrated Crop Livestock Systems? Peter Thorne1 and Sieglinde Snapp2 1International Livestock Research Institute,2Michigan State University (MSU) 2019 ASA-CSSA-SSSA International Annual Meeting 12 November 2019, San Antonio, Texas, USA
  2. What is Sustainable Intensification? [Sustainable Intensification is occurring when] yields are increased without adverse environmental impact and without the cultivation of more land ] Reaping the benefits: Science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture. Royal Society, 2009
  3. How can we “measure” SI? Intensification: Output : Input e.g. grain yield: quantity produced / unit area Sustainability: development that meets the needs of the present without compromising those of future generations (Brundtland Commission, 1987) Multi-dimensional: Environment, Economic, Human, Social, Production (SI Assessment Framework).
  4. Component Research Systems Research in Agriculture ß Differences à Focused on a single hierarchical / organisational level Can be, and often is, focused on multiple levels Focused on an individual process within that level Focused on multiple processes within levels or processes at multiple levels, and their interactions Many exogenous factors potentially impact on the processes studied Few (relatively) such exogenous factors are left outside the system boundary Members of research teams generally align with a single, scientific discipline Interdisciplinarity essential for systematic analysis Tends to lead to increasingly detailed knowledge of the processes under study Tends to lead to increasing appreciation of the scope of the processes that make up the system Better suited to the analysis of single dimensions Better suited to the analysis of complexity Likely to generate more answers than questions Likely to generate more questions than answers but these questions are likely to be key to a broad understanding ß Interactions à CR generates detail for more robust system descriptions SRA provides context for better prioritisation of CR Systems / foresight models can be built from CR process descriptions Component research vs. systems research
  5. Component research solution Biophysical outcomes Increase in grain yield (t ha-1) 0.31 Increase in residue biomass (t ha-1) 0.57 Loss of weed biomass (t ha-1) 2.15 Cost benefit analysis Total incremental return (ETB) 5,790 Increase in labour cost (ETB) 1,440 Net incremental return 4,350 Opportunity cost of feed (ETB) 4,300 Value cost ratio (VCR) 1.01
  6. Systems research solution System Feed Yield (t ha-1) Grain Yield (t ha-1) Net Return (ETB ha-1) 5.6 3.3 35,032 2.6 3.6 36,756 7.4 3.4 41,869 Traditional “Improved” Redesigned
  7. Doubled up legume: GRAIN for food & income, BIOMASS for fodder, fuelwood & fertility for the soil SI Systems gradient, intermediate multipurpose ‘doubled up legume’ rotation provides farmer-approved solution. Annuals - for food Perennials – biomass for soil fertility & fuelwood e.g. Bean or Soybean e.g. Gliricidia or TephrosiaPigeonpea-groundnut intercrop
  8. Maize yield (max 5000 kg/ha) Maize residue production (max 10,000 kg/ha) Maize yield stability (max 1.6) Legume residue production (max 10,000 kg/ha) Legume yield (max 860 kg/ha) Gross margin per ha (max $800) Months of soil cover (max 12) Soil carbon % change over 25yrs (min = -12%, max =… Soil N % change over 25 years (min = -15%, max =… Probability of 100% needs met (max = 100%) Probability of 200% needs met (max = 100%) % females prefering (max = 100%) Mz0 MzNPK Gnt-PP rotate MZ
  9. Indicators of Sustainable Intensification • 27 indicators quantified across 5 sustainability domains from 880 household interviews • Indicators re-scaled according to locally defined thresholds • Medians and IQRs plotted, allowing for disaggregated analysis (see figure) • Indicators can be aggregated across domains • Households can be aggregated, for example along a spectrum of agricultural intensification (production per unit of land and per unit of livestock). Icon Indicator Staple crop yield Crop value Crop diversity Milk yield Lstk value Lstk diversity Total Value Activities Income Sources Market Orientation Off Farm Income PPI (asset score) GHG emissions Icon Indicator Staple crop yield Crop value Crop diversity Milk yield Lstk value Lstk diversity Icon Indicator Staple crop yield Crop value Crop diversity Milk yield Lstk value Lstk diversity Total Value Activities Income Sources Market Orientation Off Farm Income PPI (asset score) GHG emissions Irrigation Land Conservation Soil Quality HFIAS (hunger) Icon Indicator Staple crop yield Crop value Crop diversity Milk yield Lstk value Lstk diversity Total Value Activities Income Sources Market Orientation Off Farm Income PPI (asset score) GHG emissions Irrigation Land Conservation Soil Quality HFIAS (hunger) Months Food Secure Diet Diversity Education Novel Practices Trialled Female Assets Icon Indicator Staple crop yield Crop value Crop diversity Milk yield Lstk value Lstk diversity Total Value Activities Income Sources Market Orientation Off Farm Income PPI (asset score) GHG emissions Irrigation Land Conservation Soil Quality HFIAS (hunger) Months Food Secure Diet Diversity Education Novel Practices Trialled Female Assets Owned Female Income Control Dependency Ratio Group membership Icon Indicator Staple crop yield Crop value Crop diversity Milk yield Lstk value Lstk diversity Total Value Activities Income Sources Market Orientation Off Farm Income PPI (asset score) GHG emissions Irrigation Land Conservation Soil Quality HFIAS (hunger) Months Food Secure Diet Diversity Education Novel Practices Trialled Female Assets Owned Female Income Control Dependency Ratio Group membership Extension received Skill sharing Gifts and exchange Agricultural Production EnvironmentEconomics Human Welfare Social and Society
  10. Indicators along an intensification gradient Mean number of introduced technologies still in use: 2.3 2.5 3.0 Most popular technologies (and % of households using them): Improved crop varieties (58%) Fodder trees (55%) Cultivated Forage (35%) Improved crop varieties (70%) Fodder trees (68%) Cultivated Forage (52%) Improved crop varieties (75%) Fodder trees (59%) Cultivated Forage (46%)
  11. Africa Research in Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation africa-rising.net This presentation is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. Thank You
Advertisement