Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:18:23.132Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The complex nature of mixed farming systems requires multidimensional actions supported by integrative research and development efforts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 October 2011

E. González-García ,
J. L. Gourdine ,
G. Alexandre ,
H. Archimède  and
M. Vaarst
E. González-García*
Affiliation:
INRA, Unité Mixte de Recherche (UMR 868) Systèmes d’Élevage Méditerranéens et Tropicaux (SELMET), 2 Place Pierre Viala, F-34060 Montpellier, France
J. L. Gourdine
Affiliation:
INRA, Unité de Recherches Zootechniques (UR 143), Domaine Duclos, Prise d'Eau, 97170 Petit Bourg, Guadeloupe, French West Indies
G. Alexandre
Affiliation:
INRA, Unité de Recherches Zootechniques (UR 143), Domaine Duclos, Prise d'Eau, 97170 Petit Bourg, Guadeloupe, French West Indies
H. Archimède
Affiliation:
INRA, Unité de Recherches Zootechniques (UR 143), Domaine Duclos, Prise d'Eau, 97170 Petit Bourg, Guadeloupe, French West Indies
M. Vaarst
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Health and Bioscience, Research Centre Foulum, Aarhus University, Blichers Allé, Postbox 50, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
Get access

Abstract

Mixed farming systems (MFS) have demonstrated some success by focusing on the use of integrative and holistic mechanisms, and rationally building on and using the natural and local resource base without exhausting it, while enhancing biodiversity, optimizing complementarities between crops and animal systems and finally increasing opportunities in rural livelihoods. Focusing our analysis and discussion on field experiences and empirical knowledge in the Caribbean islands, this paper discusses the opportunities for a change needed in current MFS research–development philosophy. The importance of shifting from fragile/specialized production systems to MFS under current global conditions is argued with an emphasis on the case of Small Islands Developing States (SIDS) and the Caribbean. Particular vulnerable characteristics as well as the potential and constraints of SIDS and their agricultural sectors are described, while revealing the opportunities for the ‘richness’ of the natural and local resources to support authentic and less dependent production system strategies. Examples are provided of the use of natural grasses, legumes, crop residues and agro-industrial by-products. We analyse the requirement for a change in research strategies and initiatives through the development of a complex but necessary multi-/inter-/trans-disciplinary teamwork spirit. We stress as essential the collaboration and active participation of local and regional actors, stakeholders and end-users in the identification of research priorities, as well as the generation, exchange and dissemination of knowledge and technology innovations, while strengthening the leadership roles in the conduct of integrative and participative research and development projects.

Keywords

mixed farming systemssmall islandsvulnerabilityCaribbeanholistic research approaches
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 6 , Special Issue 5: Symposium “Sustainable animal production in the tropics” (SAPT), Guadeloupe, France, November 15–18, 2010 , May 2012 , pp. 763 - 777
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akhtar, M, Malik, A 2000. Roles of organic soil amendments and soil organisms in the biological control of plant-parasitic nematodes: a review. Bioresource Technology 74, 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexandre, G, Aumont, G, Fleury, J, Coppry, O, Mulciba, P, Nepos, A 1997. Semi-intensive production of meat goats in a tropical area. The case of Creole goats grazing on Digitaria decumbens in Guadeloupe. Productions Animales 10, 43–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anríquez, G, Stamoulis, K 2007. Rural development and poverty reduction: is agriculture still the key? ESA Working Paper No. 07-02, June 2007. FAO, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Archimède, H, González-García, E, Despois, P, Etienne, T, Alexandre, G 2010. Substitution of corn and soybean with green banana fruits and Gliricidia sepium forage in sheep fed hay-based diets. Effects on intake, digestion and growth. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 94, 118–128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Archimède, H, Régnier, C, Marie-Magdeleine Chevry, C, Gourdine, JL, Rodríguez, L, González, E 2011. The alternatives to soybeans for animal feed in the tropics. In Soybean – applications and technology (ed. Tzi-Bun Ng), ISBN: 978-953-307-207-4, InTech, pp. 275–286. Retrieved May 3, 2011, from http://www.intechopen.com/articles/show/title/the-alternatives-to-soybeans-for-animal-feed-in-the-tropics.Google Scholar
Atkins, J, Mazzi, S, Ramlogan, C 1998. A study on the vulnerability of developing and island states: a composite index. Commonwealth Secretariat, London, UK.Google Scholar
Atta-Krah, K, Kindt, R, Skilton, JN, Amaral, W 2004. Managing biological and genetic diversity in tropical agroforestry. Agroforestry Systems 61, 183–194.Google Scholar
Ayoko, OB, Callan, VJ 2010. Teams’ reactions to conflict and teams’ task and social outcomes: the moderating role of transformational and emotional leadership. European Management Journal 28, 220–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bebbington, A 1999. Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Development 27, 2021–2044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bercovitz, J, Feldman, M 2011. The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: composition, social networks, and geography. Research Policy 40, 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blazy, JM, Tixier, P, Thomas, A, Ozier-Lafontaine, H, Salmon, F, Wery, J 2010. BANAD: a farm model for ex ante assessment of agro-ecological innovations and its application to banana farms in Guadeloupe. Agricultural Systems 103, 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bocquier, F, González-García, E 2010. Sustainability of ruminant agriculture in the new context: feeding strategies and features of animal adaptability into the necessary holistic approach. Animal 4, 1258–1273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boval, M, Cruz, P, Peyraud, JL, Penning, PD 2001. The effect of herbage allowance on daily intake by Creole heifers tethered on natural Dichanthium spp. pasture. Grass and Forage Science 55, 201–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cajas-Girón, YS, Sinclair, FL 2001. Characterization of multistrata silvopastoral systems on seasonally dry pastures in the Caribbean Region of Colombia. Agroforestry Systems 53, 215–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chenost, M, Geoffroy, F, Bousquet, P, Candau, M 1976. Possibilities of using bananas for feeding of ruminants in humid tropical region. Journal of Agriculture of Puerto Rico 60, 516–525.Google Scholar
de Barros, I, Blazy, JM, Rodrigues, GS, Tournebize, R, Cinna, JP 2009. Emergy evaluation and economic performance of banana cropping systems in Guadeloupe (French West Indies). Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 129, 437–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devendra, C 2002a. Crop–animal systems in Asia: implications for research. Agricultural Systems 71, 169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devendra, C 2002b. Crop–animal systems in Asia: future perspectives. Agricultural Systems 71, 179–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devendra, C 2007. Small farm systems to feed hungry Asia. Outlook on Agriculture 36, 7–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devendra, C, Sevilla, CC 2002. Availability and use of feed resources in crop–animal systems in Asia. Agricultural Systems 71, 59–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devendra, C, Thomas, D 2002. Smallholder farming systems in Asia. Agricultural Systems 71, 17–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorsett, AA, Wilson, LL, Katsigianis, TS, Guyton, RE, Cathopoulis, TE, Baylor, JE 1980. Productivity of Transvala digitgrass (Digitaria decumbens) and buffelgrass (Cenchrus ciliaris) with and without legumes utilized by native ewes in Bahamas. Turrialba 30, 189–195.Google Scholar
Elías, A 1986. Aplicación comercial de la melaza como alimento para rumiantes. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper, 72. Proceedings of an FAO Expert Consultation, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, July 7–11, 1986 (ed. R Sansoucy, G Aarts and TR Preston). Retrieved February 15, 2010, from http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/s8850e/s8850e21.htm.Google Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 2005. Small island developing states agricultural production and trade. Preferences and policy. FAO Commodities and Trade Technical Papers – 7, 2005. Retrieved January 12, 2008, from ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/y5795e/y5795e00.pdf.Google Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 2006. Banana statistics. FAO Report on an Annual Basis to Members and Observers of the Sub-Group on Bananas of the Intergovernmental Group on Bananas and Tropical Fruits. Commodities and Trade Division, FAO, Rome, May 2006. Retrieved February 22, 2010, from http://www.fao.org/es/esc/common/ecg/192/en/BAN_STAT_06.pdf.Google Scholar
Felstiner, WLF, Abel, RL, Sarat, A 1981. The emergence and transformation of disputes: naming, blaming, claiming. Law and Society Review 15, 631–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funes-Monzote, F 2008. Farming like we're here to stay: the mixed farming alternative for Cuba. PhD thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University (WAU), Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Funes-Monzote, F, Monzote, M, Lantinga, EA, van Keulen, H 2009. Conversion of specialised dairy farming systems into sustainable mixed farming systems in Cuba. Environment Development and Sustainability 11, 765–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García-Trujillo, R, Pedroso, DM 1989. Alimentos para rumiantes. Tablas de valor nutritivo. EDICA, Habana, Cuba.Google Scholar
Géoffroy, F 1985. Utilisation de la banane par les ruminants. Revue de l'Elevage et Médecine Vétérinaire des Pays Tropicaux 38, 92–96.Google Scholar
Girardin, P, Spiertz, JHJ 1993. Integrated agriculture in Western-Europe – researchers experience and limitations. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 3, 155–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gohl, BI 1970. Animal feed from local products and by-products in the British Caribbean AGA/Misc 70/25. FAO, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
González-García, E, Gourdine, JL, Fanchone, A, Alexandre, G, Archimède, H 2010. Mixed farming system for the reconversion process in the Caribbean: How to do the necessary research? Which strategies? Advances in Animal Biosciences 1, 483–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gosling, P, Shepherd, M 2005. Long-term changes in soil fertility in organic arable farming systems in England, with particular reference to phosphorus and potassium. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 105, 425–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heifetz, RA 1994. Leadership without easy answers. Belknap Press, Cam, MA, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heifetz, RA, Linsky, M 2002. Leadership on the line: staying alive through the dangers of leading. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, USA.Google Scholar
Herrero, M, Thornton, PK 2010. Mixed crop livestock systems in the developing world: present and future. Advances in Animal Biosciences 1, 481–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iglesias, J, Hernández, J, Roche, R, Menéndez, J, Shateloin, T 1996. Use of plants from the Ciénaga de Zapata in feeding domestic animals. Pastos y Forrajes 19, 195–200.Google Scholar
Jenet, A, Fernandez-Rivera, S, Tegegne, A, Wettstein, HR, Senn, M, Saurer, M, Langhans, W, Kreuzer, M 2006. Evidence for different nutrient partitioning in Boran (Bos indicus) and Boran × Holstein cows when re-allocated from low to high or from high to low feeding level. Journal of Veterinary Medicine A 53, 383–393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knudsen, H 2000. Directorio de Colecciones de Germoplasma en América Latina y el Caribe. Retrieved April 27, 2011, from http://www.bioversityinternational.org/index.php?id=19&user_bioversitypublications_pi1[showUid]=2532.Google Scholar
Kosgey, IS, Baker, RL, Udo, HMJ, Van Arendonk, JAM 2006. Successes and failures of small ruminant breeding programmes in the tropics: a review. Small Ruminant Research 61, 13–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantinga, EA, Oomen, GJM 1998. The Minderhoudhoeve project: development of an integrated and an ecological mixed farming system. In Mixed farming systems in Europe (ed. H van Keulen, EA Lantinga and HH van Laar), pp. 115–118. Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Lantinga, EA, Rabbinge, R 1997. The renaissance of mixed farming systems: a way towards sustainable agriculture. In Gaseous nitrogen emissions from grasslands (ed. SC Jarvis and BF Pain), pp. 408–410. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Lazier, JR 1981. Dry matter productivity of eighteen native Belizean legumes and Codariocalyx gyroides with Para grass (Brachiaria mutica) under clipping. Tropical Agriculture 58, 221–233.Google Scholar
Lekule, FP, Mtenga, LA, Just, A 1988. Total replacement of cereals by cassava and rice polishings in diets of growing–finishing pigs. Tropical Agriculture 65, 321–324.Google Scholar
Mahieu, M, Aumont, G, Alexandre, G 1997. Intensive management of tropical hair sheep in Martinique (FWI). Productions Animales 10, 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahieu, M, Archimède, H, Fleury, J, Mandonnet, N, Alexandre, G 2008. Intensive grazing system for small ruminants in the tropics: the French West Indies experience and perspectives. Small Ruminant Research 77, 195–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mandonnet, N, Aumont, G, Fleury, J, Arquet, R, Varo, H, Gruner, L, Bouix, J, Vu Tien Khang, J 2001. Assessment of genetic variability of resistance to gastrointestinal nematode parasites in Creole goats in the humid tropics. Journal of Animal Science 79, 1706–1712.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mandonnet, N, Menéndez-Buxadera, A, Arquet, R, Mahieu, M, Bachand, M, Aumont, G 2006. Genetic variability in resistance to gastro-intestinal strongyles during early lactation in Creole goats. Animal Science 82, 283–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manolis, JC, Chan, KM, Finkelstein, ME, Stephens, S, Nelson, CR, Grant, JB, Dombeck, MP 2010. Leadership: a new frontier in conservation science. Conservation Biology 23, 879–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marie-Magdeleine, C, Boval, M, Philibert, L, Borde, A, Archimède, H 2010a. Effect of banana foliage (Musa × paradisiaca) on nutrition, parasite infection and growth of lambs. Livestock Science 131, 234–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marie-Magdeleine, C, Mahieu, M, Philibert, L, Despois, P, Archimède, H 2010b. Effect of cassava (Manihot esculenta) foliage on nutrition, parasite infection and growth of lambs. Small Ruminant Research 93, 10–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menard, C, Duncan, P, Fleurance, G, Georges, JY, Lila, M 2002. Comparative foraging and nutrition of horses and cattle in European wetlands. Journal of Applied Ecology 39, 120–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menéndez, J 1982. Estudio regional y clasificación de las leguminosas forrajeras, autóctonas y/o naturalizadas en Cuba. PhD thesis, Universidad de Matanzas, Cuba.Google Scholar
Miller, TR, Baird, TD, Littlefield, CM, Kofinas, GP, Chapin, FS, Redman, CL 2008. Epistemological pluralism: reorganizing interdisciplinary research. Ecology and Society 13, 46. Retrieved March 29, 2010, from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art46/.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, E, Scott, S, Cukier, J, Leyva Galán, A 2009. Institutionalizing agroecology: successes and challenges in Cuba. Agriculture and Human Values 26, 233–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oomen, GJM, Lantinga, EA, Goewie, EA 1998. Mixed farming systems as a way towards a more efficient use of nitrogen in European Union agriculture. Environmental Pollution 102 (suppl.1), 697–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oviedo, JF, Benavides, JE, Vallejo, M 1995. Estimación bioeconómica de un módulo agroforestal con cabras en el trópico húmedo. In Sistemas tradicionales y agroforestales de producción caprina en América Central y República Dominicana, Serie Técnica: Informe Técnico No. 269 (ed. JE Benavides and R Arias), pp. 211–230. Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza (CATIE), Turrialba, Costa Rica.Google Scholar
Paris, TP 2002. Crop–animal systems in Asia: socio-economic benefits and impacts on rural livelihoods. Agricultural Systems 71, 147–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, D, Nicholson, CF, Blake, RW, Ketterings, QM, Ramírez-Aviles, L, Fox, DG, Tedeschi, LO, Cherney, JH 2011. Development and evaluation of an integrated simulation model for assessing smallholder crop–livestock production in Yucatán, Mexico. Agricultural Systems 104, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, C, Allen, W, Fenemor, A, Bowden, B, Young, R 2010. Integrated catchment management research: lessons for interdisciplinary science from the Motueka Catchment, New Zealand. Marine and Freshwater Research 61, 749–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, TR, Leng, RA 1984. Supplementation of diets based on fibrous residues and byproducts. In Straw and other fibrous by-products as feeds (ed. F Sundstol and E Owen), pp. 373–413. Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Preston, TR, Willis, MB 1970. A new look at molasses for livestock feeding. Feedstuffs 42, 20–25.Google Scholar
Preston, TR, Willis, MB, Martin, JL 1969. Efficiency of utilization for fattening of the metabolizable energy of molasses-based diets. Journal of Animal Science 28, 796–801.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Preston, TR, Macleod, NA, Lassota, L, Willis, MB, Velasquez, M 1968. Sugar cane products as energy sources for pigs. Nature 17, 727–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Régnier, C, Bocage, B, Archimède, H, Renaudeau, D 2010a. Effects of processing methods on the digestibility and palatability of cassava root in growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 162, 135–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Régnier, C, Bocage, B, Archimède, H, Renaudeau, D 2010b. Nutritional and energy values of tropical foliages in pigs. Advances in Animal Biosciences 1, 421–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renaudeau, D, Lecrercq-Smekens, M, Herin, M 2006. Differences in skin characteristics in European (Large White) and Caribbean (Creole) growing pigs with reference to thermoregulation. Animal Research 55, 209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez, L, Lopez, DJ, Preston, TR, Peters, K 2006. New Cocoyam (Xanthosoma sagittifolium) leaves as partial replacement for soya bean meal in sugar cane juice diets for growing pigs. Livestock Research for Rural Development 18 Article 91. Retrieved March 11, 2011, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd18/7/rodr18091.htmGoogle Scholar
Sánchez, MD 2000. Mulberry: an exceptional forage available almost worldwide! Animal Production and Health Division. World Animal Review 93, 36–46.Google Scholar
Selwyn, NE 1980. Smallness and islandness. World Development 8, 945–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seré, C, Steinfeld, H 1996. World livestock production systems. Current status issues and trends FAO Animal Production and Health Paper 127. FAO, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Simón, L, Iglesias, R, Cáceres, O, Duquezne, P 1994. Equinos en Cítricos. Revista ACPA 13, 94–98.Google Scholar
Spangenberg, J 2004. Sustainability beyond environmentalism: the missing dimensions. Paper presented at the Governance for Sustainable Development (GoSD), Working paper 2, May 2004.Google Scholar
Sumberg, J 1998. Mixed farming in Africa: the search for order, the search for sustainability. Land Use Policy 15, 293–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The World Bank 2011. World databank. World Development Indicators (WDI) and Global Development Finance (WDF). Retrieved May 27, 2011, from http://databank.worldbank.org/ddp/home.do?Step=2&id=4.Google Scholar
Thorne, PJ, Tanner, JC 2002. Livestock and nutrient cycling in crop–animal systems in Asia. Agricultural Systems 71, 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Topps, JH 1992. Potential composition and use of legume shrubs and trees as fodders for livestock in the tropics. Journal of Agricultural Science 118, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations 2010. Statistical yearbook, fifty-third issue. Retrieved March 20, 2011, from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/syb/syb53/SYB%2053%20Final%2020%20jan%202010.pdf.Google Scholar
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) 1992. Agenda 21: programme of action for sustainable development. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), June 3–14, 1992, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 294pp.Google Scholar
Valdivié, M, Gabel, M, Hackl, W, Hidalgo, K, Dieppa, O, Febles, M 2004. Total substitution of corn by high-test sugarcane molasses in broilers. Cuban Journal of Agricultural Science 38, 167–171.Google Scholar
van Wijk, MT, Tittonell, P, Rufino, MC, Herrero, M, Pacini, C, de Ridder, N, Giller, KE 2009. Identifying key entry-points for strategic management of smallholder farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa using the dynamic farm scale simulation model NUANCES-FARMSIM. Agricultural Systems 102, 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vayssières, J, Vigne, M, Alary, V, Lecomte, P 2011. Integrated participatory modelling of actual farms to support policy making on sustainable intensification. Agricultural Systems 104, 146–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, JB 1981. Evaluation of native legumes in the Dominican Republic. Tropical Animal Production 6, 198–202.Google Scholar
Watson, CA, Oborn, I, Eriksen, J, Edwards, AC 2005. Perspectives on nutrient management in mixed farming systems. Soil Use and Management 21 (suppl. 1), 132–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xandé, X, Archimède, H, Gourdine, JL, Anais, C, Renaudeau, D 2010b. Effects of the level of sugarcane molasses on growth and carcass performance of Caribbean growing pigs reared under a ground sugarcane stalks feeding system. Tropical Animal Health and Production 42, 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xandé, X, Régnier, C, Archimède, H, Bocage, B, Noblet, J, Renaudeau, D 2010a. Nutritional values of sugarcane products in local Caribbean growing pigs. Animal 4, 745–754.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed