IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v160y2019icp251-263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecological-economic trade-offs of Diversified Farming Systems – A review

Author

Listed:
  • Rosa-Schleich, Julia
  • Loos, Jacqueline
  • Mußhoff, Oliver
  • Tscharntke, Teja

Abstract

Diversified Farming (DF) Systems aim to integrate ecological and economic benefits for sustainable agriculture. DF systems can enhance ecological benefits at the farm level and therewith reduce negative environmental externalities. However, diversification may cause economic costs for the farmer. Although considering ecological-economic trade-offs is crucial for integrating biodiversity into agricultural production, ecological and economic benefits of DF practices have rarely been analyzed conjointly. Here, we synthesize published evidence provided by reviews and meta-analyses that evaluate the ecological and economic performance of single DF practices and more complex diversification bundles. Compared to non-diversified farming, DF practices provide substantially greater biodiversity and associated ecosystem services, such as pest and weed control, soil health, nutrient and water management and carbon sequestration. Overall, the ecological benefits for the farmer were partly insufficient to outbalance economic costs in the short term, even though many examples showed that DF practices have the potential to lead to higher and more stable yields, increase profitability and reduce risks in the long-term. Combined DF practices deliver highest ecological and economic benefits on the farm level. Financial instruments are needed to increase the implementation of combined DF practices to adequately reward for the ecological benefits on the farm level.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosa-Schleich, Julia & Loos, Jacqueline & Mußhoff, Oliver & Tscharntke, Teja, 2019. "Ecological-economic trade-offs of Diversified Farming Systems – A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 251-263.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:160:y:2019:i:c:p:251-263
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.03.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800918301277
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.03.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Knowler, Duncan & Bradshaw, Ben, 2007. "Farmers' adoption of conservation agriculture: A review and synthesis of recent research," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 25-48, February.
    2. Julie Guthman, 2000. "Raising organic: An agro-ecological assessment of grower practices in California," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 17(3), pages 257-266, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Olson, Kent & Gauto, Victor & Erenstein, Olaf & Teufel, Nils & Swain, Braja & Tui, Sabine Homann-Kee & Duncan, Alan, 2021. "Estimating Farmers’ Internal Value of Crop Residues in Smallholder Crop-Livestock Systems: A South Asia Case Study," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315188, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Nick Middleton & Utchang Kang, 2017. "Sand and Dust Storms: Impact Mitigation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-22, June.
    3. Aude Ridier & Caroline Roussy & Karim Chaib, 2021. "Adoption of crop diversification by specialized grain farmers in south-western France: evidence from a choice-modelling experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 265-283, September.
    4. Nelson Mango & Clifton Makate & Lulseged Tamene & Powell Mponela & Gift Ndengu, 2018. "Adoption of Small-Scale Irrigation Farming as a Climate-Smart Agriculture Practice and Its Influence on Household Income in the Chinyanja Triangle, Southern Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-19, April.
    5. Mudaca, Joao Daniel & Tsuchiya, Toshiyuki & Yamada, Masaaki & Onwona-Agyeman, Siaw, 2015. "Household participation in Payments for Ecosystem Services: A case study from Mozambique," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 21-27.
    6. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    7. Wollni, Meike & Andersson, Camilla, 2014. "Spatial patterns of organic agriculture adoption: Evidence from Honduras," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 120-128.
    8. Ignaciuk, Ada & Malevolti, Giulia & Scognamillo, Antonio & Sitko, Nicholas J., 2022. "Can food aid relax farmers’ constraints to adopting climate-adaptive agricultural practices? Evidence from Ethiopia, Malawi and the United Republic of Tanzania," ESA Working Papers 324073, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Agricultural Development Economics Division (ESA).
    9. Conor Carney & Monica Harber Carney, 2018. "Impact of soil conservation adoption on intra‐household allocations in Zambia," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 1390-1408, November.
    10. Beatrice Dingha & Leah Sandler & Arnab Bhowmik & Clement Akotsen-Mensah & Louis Jackai & Kevin Gibson & Ronald Turco, 2019. "Industrial Hemp Knowledge and Interest among North Carolina Organic Farmers in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Ryschawy, Julie & Tiffany, Sara & Gaudin, Amélie & Niles, Meredith T. & Garrett, Rachael D., 2021. "Moving niche agroecological initiatives to the mainstream: A case-study of sheep-vineyard integration in California," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    12. Chèze, Benoît & David, Maia & Martinet, Vincent, 2020. "Understanding farmers' reluctance to reduce pesticide use: A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    13. Verena Preusse & Nils Nölke & Meike Wollni, 2024. "Urbanization and adoption of sustainable agricultural practices in the rural‐urban interface of Bangalore, India," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 72(2), pages 167-198, June.
    14. Xuezhen Xu & Fang Wang & Tao Xu & Sufyan Ullah Khan, 2023. "How Does Capital Endowment Impact Farmers’ Green Production Behavior? Perspectives on Ecological Cognition and Environmental Regulation," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, August.
    15. Teklewold, Hailemariam & Kassie, Menale & Shiferaw, Bekele & Köhlin, Gunnar, 2013. "Cropping system diversification, conservation tillage and modern seed adoption in Ethiopia: Impacts on household income, agrochemical use and demand for labor," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 85-93.
    16. Hanjra, Munir A. & Qureshi, M. Ejaz, 2010. "Global water crisis and future food security in an era of climate change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 365-377, October.
    17. Oscar Montes de Oca Munguia & Rick Llewellyn, 2020. "The Adopters versus the Technology: Which Matters More when Predicting or Explaining Adoption?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 80-91, March.
    18. Marie Lassalas & Sabine Duvaleix & Laure Latruffe, 2024. "The technical and economic effects of biodiversity standards on wheat production," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 51(2), pages 275-308.
    19. Hugh Campbell, 2009. "Breaking new ground in food regime theory: corporate environmentalism, ecological feedbacks and the ‘food from somewhere’ regime?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 26(4), pages 309-319, December.
    20. Velandia, Margarita & Clark, Christopher D. & Lambert, Dayton M. & Davis, James A. & Jensen, Kimberly & Wszelaki, Annette & Wilcox, Michael D., 2014. "Factors Affecting Producer Participation in State-sponsored Marketing Programs: The Case of Fruit and Vegetable Growers in Tennessee," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 249-265, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:160:y:2019:i:c:p:251-263. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.