FOOD, FARMING AND FUEL- WHAT ARE THE REAL ISSUES?

Integrated farming – an introduction

The concept of integrated farming was first put forward in the 1980s, when various international programmes tried to link together agriculture, forestry, food production, aquaculture, crop biological diversity, ecological concepts and rural development. The main objective was to diversify and conserve the genetic resources of crops (including traditional crops) and to create multiple products. Some of these approaches considered the value of traditional knowledge, applied to new agricultural systems.

By contrast to the green revolution (where the main aim was to obtain maximum yields), most integrated farms were searching for better farm management using available resources in a more efficient manner but within smaller areas and, often, to provide for one single farmer (or family unit). In a world with a growing population, the need to produce more foodstuffs to supply more people has become an imperative. Furthermore, the growing population has drifted towards urban areas and away from rural ones, creating the need for more crops to be produced in rural areas to sustain a growing urban population. Additionally, the need for other products such as energy and fibre has to be considered. Another turning point in recent years has been the need to consider the impact of farming practices on the landscape, at the same time as trying to mitigate greenhouse gases. This paper reviews some of these topics and how international agencies are looking again at the possibilities of integrated systems.

Integrated farming, agro-ecological and forestry systems

Integrated farming calls for multiple skills, such as raising pigs and poultry, crop and vegetable farming, growing grass and aquatic plants, and fish-farming. Examples from the 1980s can be drawn from individual farms run by families, as in Latin America, or from the Asian farming commune systems in China. In the latter case, the system was set up to respond to the national policy of all-round development, where little consideration was given to the economic benefits of individual operations.

An example given by Edwards (1987) defined lower input/sustainable agriculture as:

Integrated systems of agricultural production that are less dependent on high inputs of energy and synthetic chemicals, and more dependent on intensive management than conventional monoculture systems. These lower-input sustainable systems maintain or only slightly decrease productivity, maintain or increase net income for the farmer, and are ecologically desirable and protective of the environment (Edwards, 1987 p. 149).

Diversified systems consist of components such as crops and livestock that co-exist on the same land, independently from each other. Integrating crops and livestock on the same farm serves to minimise risk, but this system does not recycle resources. In an integrated system, crops and livestock interact to create a synergy, with recycling allowing the maximum use of available resources (IFAD, 2010).

Alongside Edwards, there were several authors during the 1980s looking at these alternative forms of production. Morales (1984), for instance, looked at the legacy of the Aztec production on chinampas (or floating productive gardens) still used in Mexico, whilst Altieri reviewed different types of production in Latin America in the 1980s (See Altieri 1985; 1987).

Achieving the benefits of integrated farming was a major consideration when planning rural development activities. The species of fish, crops, and livestock to be raised were selected on the basis of local conditions and requirements. The FAO (1979) reported that in many developing countries, the objectives of integrated farming were heavily oriented to economic, social and nutritional benefits. To achieve their aims, there was a need to create farmer cooperatives or other associations (Ibid.). Some initiatives in Asia incorporated the use of biogas with the waste from the farm.

These concepts provided an alternative to the green revolution which was already in place, and which was seeking to develop alternatives to produce higher yields through the use of more agriculture inputs (e.g. fertilisers, pesticides). Critics of the green revolution said that it led to a loss of self-independence and autonomy for farmers, as they needed the involvement of international companies leading to a loss of local germplasm (genetic characteristics) of native species (Altieri, 1986).

By contrast, from an ecological point of view, the integrated farms found in Latin America during this period used traditional knowledge in land management. This option did not provide solutions in the short term, and many farmers turned to faster options and large-scale monoculture (e.g. in Argentina) although some farmers in the region continued to adopt this approach. Literature regarding the success of some of these production systems is scarce, but some systems are still in use, such as the chinampas or the integrated farms in Asia (see FAO, 2011).

An additional factor at the present time is the growing size of population, and the need to produce more food. Figure 1 shows the production of cereal crops in kilograms per hectare in different regions in the world. It can be seen that the world’s total production has been growing slowly but not intensively. According to the United Nations Department of social and economic affairs (UNDESA, 2011), the population in 2011 is supposed to reach seven billion people and by 2025 it will reach eight billion people. This will require a higher level of production of crops for food, energy feedstocks and fibre, as well as an increase in the energy required to produce them.

Figure 1 Total production of crop cereal in the world and different regions. (Source: FAO statistical data).

What is new about current integrated systems?

All over the world, the energy needs of local communities have yet to be satisfied. New perspectives on integrated systems come from the need to integrate energy demands into all the other factors. These new integrated systems in turn require innovative types of production systems if they are to achieve their objectives. The commitment to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by 2015 (UNDP, 2011) will only be achieved with improved access to energy (sometimes considered the “forgotten” goal). Ways to improve energy access need to consider improved production systems that mitigate climate change and lead to greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions. Any proposed integrated system needs to be clear about the links between different factors as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Integrated systems in a production system.

For instance, the recently-published report by the Food and Agriculture Organsisation (FAO) on Integrated Food Energy Systems (IFES) looked at some of the problems derived from biomass production with regard to food security (Bogdanski et al, 2010). The report tried to address these issues within IFES by proposing simultaneously produced food and energy, in order to achieve the energy component of sustainable crop intensification through the ecosystem approach. The authors reported two possible forms of IFES:

Type 1: combining the production of food and biomass for energy generation on the same land, through multiple-cropping systems, or systems mixing annual and perennial crop species.
Type 2: maximising synergies between food crops, livestock, fish production and sources of renewable energy. This is achieved by the adoption of agro-industrial technology to use all products to produce energy (such as gasification or anaerobic digestion), and with the possible incorporation of alternative energy (e.g. solar and wind).

The similarity of these approaches with previous models for integrated farms is obvious, with the added factor of energy provision.

Another report from the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD, 2010) described the integration of a system which brings together a whole range of resource-saving practices to achieve acceptable profits and high and sustained production levels, while preserving the environment and minimising the negative effects of intensive farming. This approach aims to enhance biological processes, reducing soil erosion and at the same time increasing crop yields with intensified land use; thereby improving profit and helping to reduce poverty. This system is truly integrative. The report from IFAD considers integrated farms emphasising the links between livestock and crop production.

Technical skills and transfer of knowledge are needed to reproduce these systems in different parts of the world if this approach is to be an asset that can facilitate improved livelihoods and allow farmers to enter new markets on a large scale. Self-sufficiency, as in previous traditional systems, cannot be considered to be enough. The Nepal biogas support programme is an example of a successful integrated system.

Both reports (IFAD and IFES) have provided a series of examples where an integrated approach has been demonstrated not just in developing countries, but also in developed countries. Examples in the 1980s were provided by Edwards (1986) in Europe; in Stuttgart, Germany with pig farms, and in the Netherlands with dairy farms.
 

Conclusions and future work

Bogadski et al (2010) reported that the constraints in applying IFES are diverse at farm and ex-farm level, and that they include: technical aspects, political will, access to markets, financing systems and, importantly, transfer of skills. One constraint that is particularly important refers to the development and implementation of policies. If developing countries are willing to focus their goals on the main topics listed above, integrated systems can provide a good stimulus to drive forward production. The scale can be defined according to region, and the approach is valid at farm and community level.

IFAD has reported that experience in the use of this system has provided information to show that (a) adopting sustainable management practices can improve production while preserving the environment; (b) residues, wastes and by-products of each component serve as resources for the others; and (c) poor farmers have the traditional knowledge needed to integrate livestock and crop production, but because of their limited access to knowledge, assets and inputs, relatively few adopt an integrated system (IFAD, 2010, p.4).

Nevertheless, the possibilities of contributing to produce the four FFFF (fibre, food, fodder and fuel) should be a main objective at policy level, especially in countries where poverty, food insecurity and energy demands represent a risk. Some challenges still remain for decision-makers and practitioners and one of them is the need to include small farmers in order to increase the productivity of traditional farming systems, adopting an effective integrated system that produces usable biomass while conserving natural resources, and thus making it a sustainable system.

References

Altieri, M. 1986. Bases ecológicas para el desarrollo de sistemas agrícolas alternativos para campesinos de Latinoamérica. http://agroeco.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Altieri-bases-ecol.sist-campesinos-1986pdf.pdf. Accessed: June 2011.

Altieri M and Merrick L. 199. Agroecology and in situ conservation of native crop diversity in the Third World. Chapter 40.

Altieri M and Anderson M K. 1986. An ecological basis for the development of alternative agricultural systems for small farmers in the Third World. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 1, pp 30-38

Bogdanski A, Dubois O, Jamieson C and Krell R. 2010. Integrated Food-Energy Systems: How to make them work in a climate-friendly way and benefit small-scale farmers and rural communities. An Overview . Food and Agriculture Organisation. Rome. Pp. 103.

Edwards C.1987. The concept of integrated systems in lower input/sustainable agriculture. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 2, pp 148-152 .

FAO. 1979. Aquaculture Development in ChinaReport on an FAO/UNDP Aquaculture Study Tour to the People's Republic of China, led by T.V.R. Pillay, Aquaculture Development and Coordination Programme, FAO, Rome, Italy, 2 May-1 June 1978. http://www.fao.org/docrep/X5686E/x5686e00.htm#Contents, Accessed June 2011.

IFAD. 2010. Integrated crop-livestock farming systems. International Fund for Agricultural Development. Rome, Italy. http://www.ifad.org/lrkm/factsheet/IntegratedCrop.pdf. Accessed June 2011.

Morales, 1984. H.L. Morales , Chinampas and integrated farms. In: F. Di Castri and M. Hadley, Editors, Ecology in Practice, UNESCO, Paris (1984).

Bajgain S and Shakya I. 2005. The Nepal Biogas Support Program: A Successful Model Of Public Private Partnership For Rural Household Energy Supply.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTENERGY/Publications/20918309/NepalBiogasSupportProgram.pdf. Accessed June 2011.

UNDESA. 2011. World Population Prospects, the 2010 review. http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Other-Information/faq.htm. Accessed June 2011.

UNDP. 2011. Millennium Development Goals. http://www.undp.org/mdg/basics.shtml. Accessed June 2011.