IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v14y2025i1p17-d1571862.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Dynamic Evaluation of the Use of Natural Resources in Crop Rotation in Family Farming Production Units

Author

Listed:
  • Dayhanna Stephania Vargas

    (Engineering Faculty, Instituto Universitario Antonio José Camacho, Industrial Engineering, Cali 760000, Valle del Cauca, Colombia
    Engineering Faculty, Universidad del Valle, Industrial Engineering, Cali 760000, Valle del Cauca, Colombia)

  • Juan Carlos Osorio

    (Engineering Faculty, Universidad del Valle, Industrial Engineering, Cali 760000, Valle del Cauca, Colombia)

  • Juan José Bravo

    (Engineering Faculty, Universidad del Valle, Industrial Engineering, Cali 760000, Valle del Cauca, Colombia)

Abstract

A total of 35.4% of the earth’s surface is used for agriculture, and 32.7% of it for crops. Agricultural activity uses 70% of the world’s freshwater, and due to the intensive use of agrochemical inputs and energy, a high percentage of greenhouse gas emissions, pollution, and waste are generated. With the increase in population and fluctuating consumption trends, it is necessary to increase crop production and productivity to meet present and future demands. A relevant factor for the analysis of the production of agricultural goods is the size of the productive unit since about 84% is less than 2 ha in size and distributed over 12% of arable land; however, it is important to highlight other factors, such as the availability of family labour, crop diversification and the development of other agricultural activities that have a lower use of insecticides, pesticides, and chemical fertilisers compared to industrial crops. Therefore, food is produced, providing social and ecological benefits. Thus, a dynamic simulation is presented to evaluate the use of natural resources in developing different rotations of transient and permanent crops in a municipality in Colombia. This study assesses the impact on land use, soil degradation due to crop development, and the total water footprint associated with each rotation.

Suggested Citation

  • Dayhanna Stephania Vargas & Juan Carlos Osorio & Juan José Bravo, 2025. "A Dynamic Evaluation of the Use of Natural Resources in Crop Rotation in Family Farming Production Units," Resources, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-29, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:14:y:2025:i:1:p:17-:d:1571862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/14/1/17/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/14/1/17/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mwambo, Francis Molua & Fürst, Christine & Nyarko, Benjamin K. & Borgemeister, Christian & Martius, Christopher, 2020. "Maize production and environmental costs: Resource evaluation and strategic land use planning for food security in northern Ghana by means of coupled emergy and data envelopment analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    2. Lauren Gies & Datu Agusdinata & Venkatesh Merwade, 2014. "Drought adaptation policy development and assessment in East Africa using hydrologic and system dynamics modeling," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 74(2), pages 789-813, November.
    3. Ali Mirchi & Kaveh Madani & David Watkins & Sajjad Ahmad, 2012. "Synthesis of System Dynamics Tools for Holistic Conceptualization of Water Resources Problems," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(9), pages 2421-2442, July.
    4. Inas El-Gafy, 2014. "System Dynamic Model for Crop Production, Water Footprint, and Virtual Water Nexus," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(13), pages 4467-4490, October.
    5. Egerer, Sabine & Cotera, Rodrigo Valencia & Celliers, Louis & Costa, María Máñez, 2021. "A leverage points analysis of a qualitative system dynamics model for climate change adaptation in agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    6. Verena Seufert & Navin Ramankutty & Jonathan A. Foley, 2012. "Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture," Nature, Nature, vol. 485(7397), pages 229-232, May.
    7. Ali, Muhammad Fadzli & Sulong, Siti Hawa & Julius, Kotir & Smith, Carl & Aziz, Ammar Abdul, 2022. "Using a participatory system dynamics modelling approach to inform the management of Malaysian rubber production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    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. Vekhande, Shraddha & Rao, Bakul, 2024. "Developing causal loop diagrams for the perusal of soil health in agricultural practices – A case study of rice nursery cultivation practices in India," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    2. Guangyao Deng & Liujuan Wang & Yanan Song, 2015. "Effect of Variation of Water-Use Efficiency on Structure of Virtual Water Trade - Analysis Based on Input–Output Model," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(8), pages 2947-2965, June.
    3. Wang, Linlin & Li, Qiang & Coulter, Jeffrey A. & Xie, Junhong & Luo, Zhuzhu & Zhang, Renzhi & Deng, Xiping & Li, Linglin, 2020. "Winter wheat yield and water use efficiency response to organic fertilization in northern China: A meta-analysis," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    4. Daniel P. Roberts & Autar K. Mattoo, 2018. "Sustainable Agriculture—Enhancing Environmental Benefits, Food Nutritional Quality and Building Crop Resilience to Abiotic and Biotic Stresses," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, January.
    5. Abduraupov, Rustam & Akhmadjanova, Gulmira & Ibragimov, Abdulla & Bala, B.K. & Sidique, Shaufique F. & Makhmudov, Miraziz & Angelina, Kim, 2022. "Modeling of water management for cotton production in Uzbekistan," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    6. Sadowski, Arkadiusz & Wojcieszak-Zbierska, Monika Małgorzata & Zmyślona, Jagoda, 2024. "Agricultural production in the least developed countries and its impact on emission of greenhouse gases – An energy approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    7. Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas & Lusk, Jayson & Magnier, Alexandre, 2018. "The price of non-genetically modified (non-GM) food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 38-50.
    8. Zuzana Fuksová & Iveta Bošková & Jana Hlaváčková & Marek Novák, 2025. "The economic aspects of organic farms selling their products to organic or conventional market," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 71(4), pages 218-227.
    9. Kazi Ali Tamaddun & Ajay Kalra & Sajjad Ahmad, 2019. "Spatiotemporal Variation in the Continental US Streamflow in Association with Large-Scale Climate Signals Across Multiple Spectral Bands," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(6), pages 1947-1968, April.
    10. Nesar Ahmed & Shirley Thompson & Giovanni M. Turchini, 2020. "Organic aquaculture productivity, environmental sustainability, and food security: insights from organic agriculture," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(6), pages 1253-1267, December.
    11. Bourceret, Amélie & Accatino, Francesco & Robert, Corinne, 2024. "A modeling framework of a territorial socio-ecosystem to study the trajectories of change in agricultural phytosanitary practices," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 494(C).
    12. Walters, Jeffrey P. & Archer, David W. & Sassenrath, Gretchen F. & Hendrickson, John R. & Hanson, Jon D. & Halloran, John M. & Vadas, Peter & Alarcon, Vladimir J., 2016. "Exploring agricultural production systems and their fundamental components with system dynamics modelling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 333(C), pages 51-65.
    13. Kalle Margus & Viacheslav Eremeev & Evelin Loit & Eve Runno-Paurson & Erkki Mäeorg & Anne Luik & Liina Talgre, 2022. "Impact of Farming System on Potato Yield and Tuber Quality in Northern Baltic Sea Climate Conditions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-12, April.
    14. de la Cruz, Vera Ysabel V. & Tantriani, & Cheng, Weiguo & Tawaraya, Keitaro, 2023. "Yield gap between organic and conventional farming systems across climate types and sub-types: A meta-analysis," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    15. Bang, Rasmus & Hansen, Bjørn Gunnar & Guajardo, Mario & Sommerseth, Jon Kristian & Flaten, Ola & Asheim, Leif Jarle, 2024. "Conventional or organic cattle farming? Trade-offs between crop yield, livestock capacity, organic premiums, and government payments," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    16. Maurer, Rainer, 2023. "Comparing the effect of different agricultural land-use systems on biodiversity," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    17. Natalia Brzezina & Birgit Kopainsky & Erik Mathijs, 2016. "Can Organic Farming Reduce Vulnerabilities and Enhance the Resilience of the European Food System? A Critical Assessment Using System Dynamics Structural Thinking Tools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-32, September.
    18. Patrick M. Carr & Greta G. Gramig & Mark A. Liebig, 2013. "Impacts of Organic Zero Tillage Systems on Crops, Weeds, and Soil Quality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(7), pages 1-30, July.
    19. 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.
    20. Rossella Vito & Alessandro Pagano & Ivan Portoghese & Raffaele Giordano & Michele Vurro & Umberto Fratino, 2019. "Integrated Approach for Supporting Sustainable Water Resources Management of Irrigation Based on the WEFN Framework," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(4), pages 1281-1295, March.

    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:gam:jresou:v:14:y:2025:i:1:p:17-:d:1571862. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.