To mulch or to munch? Big modelling of big data

cg.contactd.rodriguez@uq.edu.auen_US
cg.contributor.centerInternational Livestock Research Institute - ILRIen_US
cg.contributor.centerKenya Agriculture and Livestock Research Organization - KALROen_US
cg.contributor.centerUniversity of Queensland, Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation - UQ - Qaafien_US
cg.contributor.centerLancaster Universityen_US
cg.contributor.crpCGIAR Research Program on Dryland Systems - DSen_US
cg.contributor.funderNot Applicableen_US
cg.contributor.project-lead-instituteInternational Livestock Research Institute - ILRIen_US
cg.coverage.countryKEen_US
cg.coverage.regionEastern Africaen_US
cg.creator.idRufino, Mariana C.: 0000-0003-4293-3290en_US
cg.identifier.doihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2017.01.010en_US
cg.isijournalISI Journalen_US
cg.issn0308-521Xen_US
cg.journalAgricultural Systemsen_US
cg.subject.agrovocagricultureen_US
cg.subject.agrovocdataen_US
cg.subject.agrovocfarming systemsen_US
cg.volume153en_US
dc.contributordeVoil, Peteren_US
dc.contributorRufino, Mariana C.en_US
dc.contributorOdendo, M.en_US
dc.contributorWijk, Mark vanen_US
dc.creatorRodriguez, Danielen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-05T22:39:58Z
dc.date.available2017-04-05T22:39:58Z
dc.description.abstractAfrican farmers are poorly resourced, highly diverse and aground by poverty traps making them rather impervious to change. As a consequence R4D efforts usually result in benefits but also trade-offs that constraint adoption and change. A typical case is the use of crop residues as mulches or as feedstock. Here we linked a database of household surveys with a dynamic whole farm simulation model, to quantify the diversity of trade-offs from the alternative use of crop residues. Simulating all the households in the survey (n=613) over 99 years of synthetic climate data, showed that benefits and trade-offs from “mulching or munching” differ across agro-ecologies, and within agro-ecologies across typologies of households. Even though trade-offs between household production or income and environmental outcomes could be managed; the magnitude of the simulated benefits fromthe sustainable intensification of maize-livestock systemswere small. Our modelling framework shows the benefits from the integration of socio-economic and biophysical approaches to support the design of development programs. Our results support the argument that a greater focus is required on the development and diversification of farmers' livelihoods within the framework of an improved understanding of the interconnectedness between biophysical, socio-economic and market factors.en_US
dc.formatPDFen_US
dc.identifierhttps://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/79783en_US
dc.identifierhttps://mel.cgiar.org/reporting/downloadmelspace/hash/mTbriG5Z/v/f1e8c3e4108846866845fde300ff32b6en_US
dc.identifier.citationDaniel Rodriguez, Peter deVoil, Mariana C. Rufino, M. Odendo, Mark van Wijk. (17/1/2016). To mulch or to munch? Big modelling of big data. Agricultural Systems, 153, pp. 32-42.en_US
dc.identifier.statusOpen accessen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/6592
dc.languageenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Massonen_US
dc.rightsCC-BY-NC-4.0en_US
dc.sourceAgricultural Systems;153,(2016) Pagination 32-42en_US
dc.subjectapsimen_US
dc.subjectwhole farm modellingen_US
dc.subjectintegrative analysesen_US
dc.subjectfarm diversityen_US
dc.subjectcrop-livestocken_US
dc.titleTo mulch or to munch? Big modelling of big dataen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dcterms.available2016-01-17en_US
dcterms.extent32-42en_US
mel.impact-factor2.867en_US

Files