Presented by Peter Thorne (ILRI) and Sieg Snapp (Michigan State University) at the 2019 ASA-CSSA-SSSA International Annual Meeting, San Antonio, USA, 12 November 2019.

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