LMRC

Landscape Measures Resource Center

Feed on
Posts
Comments

3.2 Production Goals and Criteria

Sep 19th, 2007 by leb3

At least two characteristics differentiate integrated agricultural landscape mosaics from more conventional agricultural landscapes. First, integrated (conservation and production) landscapes consist of a mutually interdependent set of agricultural, semi-natural, and natural ecosystems, and land management practices actively acknowledge and foster this interdependence. Second, such landscapes usually consist of a wide variety of production systems, which could include annual and perennial cropping, various livestock systems, agroforests, wild forests, and fisheries.

A diversity of fodder trees are planted around millet and rice terraces.

Agricultural production depends upon healthy ecosystems to provide groundwater and surface water for irrigation, to sustain wild pollinators of crops, to regulate crop and livestock diseases, to maintain soil fertility, to protect crops or livestock from the sun or wind, and to decompose wastes. Wild species also play an important role in providing livestock fodder, fuel, medicines, soil nutrient supplements, and construction materials.

Historically, though, agricultural practices have often degraded the very biodiversity and ecosystem functions on which they depend. This occurs through impacts ranging from land conversion and hydrological modification to pollution and sedimentation to the elimination of beneficial species and the introduction of nuisance invasive species.

In contrast to many aspects of conventional agricultural practice, management of mating_insects_590654.jpgsustainable agricultural landscape mosaics can promote synergies between crop, livestock, fisheries and forest production and ecosystem functioning. Rather than turning to artificial substitutes, practitioners seek to capture the value of natural services by taking specific management actions to sustain biodiversity and ecosystem functions that support agricultural production.

For example, native species may be conserved by protecting undisturbed areas for nesting and protective cover, maintaining species’ access to food and water sources, minimizing water pollution from farm runoff, providing functional habitat corridors, and maintaining biologically active soils. Watershed functions can be conserved by maintaining natural soil structure to promote rainfall infiltration, maintaining native riparian vegetation, preventing agricultural pollution and wastes from entering streams or groundwater, maintaining soil cover year-round, protecting wetlands, and allowing streams and rivers to meander in their natural course.

The following five criteria for agricultural production are consistent with this vision. They also recognize that for agricultural systems to deliver benefits over the long run, they must be financially viable and meet the needs of people who depend on them. Otherwise they are likely to be abandoned or lead to over-exploitation, and thus be unsustainable.

shutterstock_1011929.jpg

Production goal: The landscape provides for the sustainable production of crops, livestock, fish, forest, and wild edible resources.

Criterion P1: Production systems satisfy demand for agricultural products (crops, livestock, fish, wood) by consumers inside and outside the landscape.

This criterion tracks the orientation of a landscape toward supplying goods for local or for external markets. It assumes that farmers switch products because it is in their interest to do so, therefore responsiveness can be tracked by examining changes in area or outputs (yields and prices) of major enterprises.

Criterion P2: Production systems are financially viable and can adapt to changes in input and output markets.

Financially viable production systems imply that there are positive returns to producers. Financial viability is more likely when producers are tied into markets that enable a high portion of the value of production to be retained locally.

Criterion P3: Production systems are resilient to natural and anthropogenic disturbances.

Production systems maintain the natural capital that sustains production over time and makes them resilient. Disturbances may include drought, flood, mudslides, disease, and climate change.

Criterion P4: Production practices have a neutral or positive impact on wild biodiversity and ecosystem services in the landscape.

By emphasizing the use of biological inputs, crop rotations, soil cover, and diverse assemblages of plants, while limiting chemical inputs, and also by strategically locating production systems in the landscape, habitat values can be conserved and ecosystem service delivery can be enhanced.

Criterion P5: Species and varietal diversity of crops, livestock, fisheries and forests is adequate and maintained.

Agrobiodiversity is conserved globally, but is managed locally to enhance and sustain agricultural production.

Back to Unit Home

Next Section

Continue to Unit 4: Choosing Indicators


Bookmark It

Add to Del.icio.us Add to digg Add to Facebook Add to Google Bookmarks Add to reddit Add to Twitter

Posted in Process, Unit 3. Establishing goals and criteria | No Comments

Comments are closed.

  • home
    home
    Partners and Sponsors
    Tour of the LMRC
    Unit 1 Defining the approach
    Unit 2 Engaging stakeholders
    Unit 3 Creating performance
    goals and criteria
    Unit 4 Choosing indicators
    Unit 5 Establishing a baseline
    Unit 6 Tracking change
    Conceptual tools
    Communication tools
    Landscape planning tools
    Scoring tools
    Data collection tools
    Gender analysis tools
    Spatial analysis tools
    Trend analysis tools
    Africa
    Asia
    Latin America
    North America
    How to contribute
    Login to comment
    Discussion forum
     
           

  • For more information go to the Sponsor Page.
  • Meta

    • Log in
    • Entries RSS
    • Comments RSS
    • WordPress.org
  • Creative Commons License
    Landscape Measures Resource Center by Cornell University & Ecoagriculture Partners is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

LMRC © 2019 LMRC

Ecoagriculture Partners | Cornell Univ. Ecoag. Working Group