Farmer perspectives on introducing perennial cereal in Swedish farming systems: a sustainability analysis of plant traits, farm management, and ecological implications

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 432-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Marquardt ◽  
G. Vico ◽  
C. Glynn ◽  
M. Weih ◽  
K. Eksvärd ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosalia Filippini ◽  
Elisa Marraccini ◽  
Sylvie Lardon ◽  
Enrico Bonari

Short food supply chains (SFSCs) have been identified as an economic opportunity for agriculture under urban pressure, as well as drivers for more sustainable farming systems. However, few studies have focused on the intensity of periurban farms that participate in such SFSCs, compared with the performance of the other farms. In this paper, we examined the relationship between agricultural intensity and the market orientation in a representative sample of farms in the urban area of Pisa (Italy). We define <em>agricultural intensity</em> as the intensity of land use and its main drivers (<em>e.g</em>., farm management or the individual characteristics of farmers), and <em>market orientation</em> as the ratio of farm produce within conventional, short or mixed foodsupply chains. The results suggest that the market orientation of periurban farming systems is more correlated to the indicators of farm management and land use intensity than to the individual farmer’s characteristics. This result provides the first evidence that market orientation is a driver of intensity, and that individual farmer’s characteristics are not significantly different in the three groups of market orientation. These findings could be generalised to other urban areas and correlated with the main orientation of farming systems in order to support both the assessment of farming systems and the implementation of innovative urban food policies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shamsheer ul Haq ◽  
Ismet Boz

ABSTRACT: The primary purpose of this study was to analyze the efficiency level of tea farms operated by owners and shareholders, and to explore the effect of different decisional, structural and management factors on efficiency. The data were collected from a stratified sample of 138 tea farmers operated in Rize province Turkey in 2017. The data envelopment analysis (DEA) program was used to estimate the efficiency scores. Tobit model was used to explore determinants of technical efficiency. Results disclosed that farmers can reduce their inputs use by 43% without compromising their yield level. However, they have low economic efficiency (0.41). Shareholder-operated farms were highly efficient (0.76) than the owner-operated farms. The factors such as old tea parcels, high land slope, and altitude were having a significant negative effect on farms’ efficiency. Applying fertilizer in the root zone or mixed with soil, terracing of farmland, and performing of soil test was positively and significantly contributing to efficiency. Generally, the efficiency of tea farmers is low, and mostly farm management and structure related factors were negatively affecting the farmer’s efficiency. The farmers should be aware of associated benefits with early replanting tea, fertilizer application in the root zone and terracing to control their production cost.


Author(s):  
Nicola P. Randall ◽  
Barbara Smith

This chapter focuses on the role of farm management in biodiversity conservation (and the potential conflicts and synergies between them). It addresses the question of the relationship between productivity and biodiversity, and how this varies between spatial scale and agricultural system. Different methods of farm management for improved biodiversity and resource management on farmland are presented. The focus areas are reintroducing diversity, sustainable pest and nutrient management, and the role of alternative systems such as organic and biodynamic agriculture. Frameworks for regulating the biological impacts of agriculture (e.g. pesticide regulation, ecological engineering, and funding for conservation are also introduced. Other case studies may include organic farming systems, agroforestry systems, and perennial-based cropping systems, as well as the use of integrated pest management techniques.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fanrong Meng

&lt;p&gt;Plastic mulching is a common farming practice in arid and semi-arid regions. Inappropriate disposal of plastic films can lead to the contamination of macroplastics (MaPs) and microplastics (MiPs) in the soil. To study the effects of plastic mulching on the contamination of soil with MaPs and MiPs and the role of farm management on this contamination, research was done on two farming systems in Northwest China, where plastic mulching is intensively used. Farming in Wutong Village (S1) is characterized by small plots and low-intensity machinery tillage while farming in Shihezi (S2) is characterized by large plots and high-intensity machinery tillage. Soils were sampled to a depth of 30 cm and analysed. The results showed that MaPs ranged from 30.3 kg&amp;#183;ha&lt;sup&gt;-1&lt;/sup&gt; to 82.3 kg&amp;#183;ha&lt;sup&gt;-1&lt;/sup&gt; in S1 and from 43.5 kg&amp;#183;ha&lt;sup&gt;-1&lt;/sup&gt; to 148 kg&amp;#183;ha&lt;sup&gt;-1&lt;/sup&gt; in S2. The main macroplastics&amp;#160; size categories were 2-10 cm&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; and 10-50 cm&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; in S1 and&amp;#160; &lt; 2 cm&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; and 2-10 cm&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; in S2. In S1, we found that 6-8 years of continuous mulching practice resulted in the accumulation of more MaPs as compared to the use of intermittent mulching over the span of 30 years. For S2,&amp;#160; 6 to 15 years of plastic mulching use led to MaPs accumulation in fields but from 15 to18 years, the MaPs number and content in soils dropped due to further fragmentation of the plastic and its dispersal into the environment. MiPs were mainly detected in fields with &gt; 30 years of mulching use in S1 and discovered in all fields in S2, this indicated that&amp;#160; long-term cultivation and high-intensity machinery tillage could lead to more severe microplastic pollution. These results emphasized the impacts of&amp;#160; farm management on the accumulation and spread of MaPs and MiPs in the soil and regulations are needed to prevent further contamination of the soil.&lt;/p&gt;


2006 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 143 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. L. McCown ◽  
L. E. Brennan ◽  
K. A. Parton

A potential source of lessons for agricultural modellers aspiring to influence farm decision making is the historical experience of agricultural economists in the field, variously termed ‘Farm Management Research’ or ‘Farm Management’. Although the histories of Farm Management in the USA and in Australia differ significantly, in both cases the field was originally characterised by pragmatic on-farm research by agricultural scientists and later taken over by agricultural economists committed to theory-based economic analysis to enable rational planning and decision making. But in both countries, it became painfully evident to reflective participants that model-based Farm Management was not proving relevant to practical managers of farms. An insightful few went further to conclude not just that theoretical models of practice had not been relevant but that they could not be relevant, and since the late 1970s, the field has been in crisis. In this series of 2 papers, we seek insights that might explain this extraordinary ‘market’ failure of models that generate theoretical best practice as a basis for intervention. As an ‘experiment’, the history of Farm Management is enriched by the discontinuity between 2 ‘eras’ characterised by 2 contrasting intervention approaches, an ‘early’ interactive and pragmatic era and a ‘late’ academic and theoretical era. In this first paper, after a brief history of the early pragmatic era and the ‘take-over’ by economic theorists, we analyse the ‘crisis of relevance’ that led to demise, relying heavily on the remarkable intellectual journey of John Dillon, the first Professor of Farm Management in Australia who turned from being elder economic theoretician to pioneer philosopher of pragmatic Farming Systems Research. The significant turn to Farming Systems Research by disillusioned Farm Management economists in the 1980s was preceded by a turn to another systems approach 2 decades earlier, that of agricultural systems modelling. Learning from the autecology of these significant systems efforts to influence the management of farms is the aim of the second paper in this series.


1999 ◽  
Vol 79 (4) ◽  
pp. 647-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Y. Leeson ◽  
J. W. Sheard ◽  
A. G. Thomas

On-farm studies provide a realistic setting to examine the impact of interactions of management practices on weed communities within various farming systems. Clustering farm units into groups that use similar management practices enables the replication of farm management systems within on-farm studies. The goal of this study is to objectively classify farm units into management systems on the basis of quantitative variables describing aspects of cropping history and chemical input levels using multivariate techniques. Twenty-eight Saskatchewan farmers provided details of their management practices from 1990 to 1997 through a series of questionnaires. Twelve variables derived from the questionnaires were used to describe cropping history, pesticide, tillage and fertilizer use on each farm unit. These variables were used to cluster farm units using minimum variance classification and NMS ordination. Both techniques identified seven farm management systems. The greatest differences were observed between organic and non-organic systems. Farm management systems that used annual fallow and continuous annual cropping histories were most similar. The consistent results obtained by use of the two unrelated methodologies indicate the utility of this approach for the classification of farm management systems. Key words: Farm management system, classification, cropping history, chemical input level, on-farm


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document