IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i18p8461-d1754237.html

Spatial Typology of Lorena Avocado Production Systems in Colombian Lowlands (Casanare): Integrating Agronomic and Socioeconomic Characteristics

Author

Listed:
  • Juan P. Taramuel-Taramuel

    (Escuela de Administración y Contaduría Pública, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá 111321, Colombia
    Grupo de Investigación Biogénesis, Departamento de Desarrollo Rural y Agroalimentario, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá 111321, Colombia)

  • Iván A. Montoya-Restrepo

    (Departamento de Ingeniería de la Organización, Facultad de Minas, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Medellín 050034, Colombia)

  • Aquiles Enrique Darghan Contreras

    (Departamento de Agronomía, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá 111321, Colombia)

  • Diego Miranda Lasprilla

    (Departamento de Agronomía, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá 111321, Colombia)

  • Dursun Barrios

    (Grupo de Investigación Biogénesis, Departamento de Desarrollo Rural y Agroalimentario, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá 111321, Colombia)

Abstract

Understanding the diversity of avocado production systems is crucial for developing effective agricultural policies and extension strategies. This study examined the Colombian avocado variety “Lorena” in the Colombian lowlands of Casanare through spatial typology analysis to inform sustainable agricultural development strategies. We employed spatial autoregressive modeling and clustering techniques to analyze data from 45 production systems, revealing heterogeneity despite small-scale operations with productivity (2.9 ton ha −1 ) below regional (8 ton ha −1 ) and national averages (11.03 ton ha −1 ). Five distinct typologies emerged: transitional traditional ( n = 15), intensive technical management ( n = 4), experience-based traditional ( n = 5), balanced management ( n = 10), and comprehensive technical systems ( n = 11). In contrast to conventional assumptions about economies of scale, productivity was not primarily determined by farm size, as smaller intensive technical management systems achieved the highest yields (3375 kg) despite having the smallest size (162.50 trees), followed by experience-based traditional systems (3280 kg). The spatial autoregressive model effectively captured spatial dependence in yield patterns, demonstrating the importance of geographic context in agricultural system analysis. Technology/practice adoption patterns varied markedly, with high adoption of established practices (>90%) but low foliar analysis adoption (17.78%). High organic fertilization adoption (93.33%) reflected a commitment to environmental sustainability but may partially explain productivity gaps, highlighting trade-offs between sustainability and short-term yield optimization. Socioeconomic analysis revealed characteristics of part-time farming systems, with 91.11% of producers having additional income sources and 95.56% using hired labor, suggesting evolved livelihood strategies that may enhance resilience. These findings challenge one-size-fits-all development approaches and demonstrate the need for tailored, spatially targeted interventions that account for specific production system characteristics, multiple pathways to sustainable intensification, and the complex interactions between productivity, sustainability, and socioeconomic factors in smallholder agriculture.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan P. Taramuel-Taramuel & Iván A. Montoya-Restrepo & Aquiles Enrique Darghan Contreras & Diego Miranda Lasprilla & Dursun Barrios, 2025. "Spatial Typology of Lorena Avocado Production Systems in Colombian Lowlands (Casanare): Integrating Agronomic and Socioeconomic Characteristics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-17, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8461-:d:1754237
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8461/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8461/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marie Chavent & Vanessa Kuentz-Simonet & Amaury Labenne & Jérôme Saracco, 2018. "ClustGeo: an R package for hierarchical clustering with spatial constraints," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 1799-1822, December.
    2. Dicle Dönmez & Musab A. Isak & Tolga İzgü & Özhan Şimşek, 2024. "Green Horizons: Navigating the Future of Agriculture through Sustainable Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-20, April.
    3. Rada, Nicholas E. & Fuglie, Keith O., 2019. "New perspectives on farm size and productivity," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 147-152.
    4. Dimitrios Iakovidis & Yiorgos Gadanakis & Julian Park, 2023. "Farmer and Adviser Perspectives on Business Planning and Control in Mediterranean Agriculture: Evidence from Argolida, Greece," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, February.
    5. Ana Trigo & Ana Marta-Costa & Rui Fragoso, 2021. "Principles of Sustainable Agriculture: Defining Standardized Reference Points," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, April.
    6. Stéphanie Alvarez & Carl J Timler & Mirja Michalscheck & Wim Paas & Katrien Descheemaeker & Pablo Tittonell & Jens A Andersson & Jeroen C J Groot, 2018. "Capturing farm diversity with hypothesis-based typologies: An innovative methodological framework for farming system typology development," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-24, May.
    7. Haonan Zhang & Zheng Chen & Jieyong Wang & Haitao Wang & Yingwen Zhang, 2023. "Spatial-Temporal Pattern of Agricultural Total Factor Productivity Change (Tfpch) in China and Its Implications for Agricultural Sustainable Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, March.
    8. 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.
    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. Pépin, Antonin & Morel, Kevin & van der Werf, Hayo M.G., 2021. "Conventionalised vs. agroecological practices on organic vegetable farms: Investigating the influence of farm structure in a bifurcation perspective," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    2. Ionuț-Alexandru Spânu & Alexandru Ozunu & Dacinia Crina Petrescu & Ruxandra Malina Petrescu-Mag, 2022. "A Comparative View of Agri-Environmental Indicators and Stakeholders’ Assessment of Their Quality," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-23, March.
    3. Elizabeth Ahikiriza & Joshua Wesana & Xavier Gellynck & Guido Van Huylenbroeck & Ludwig Lauwers, 2021. "Context Specificity and Time Dependency in Classifying Sub-Saharan Africa Dairy Cattle Farmers for Targeted Extension Farm Advice: The Case of Uganda," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, August.
    4. Jaime Martín-García & José A. Gómez-Limón & Manuel Arriaza, 2023. "Conventional versus organic olive farming: which has a better economic performance?," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-27, December.
    5. Hannah Romanowski & Lauren Blake, 2023. "Neonicotinoid seed treatment on sugar beet in England: a qualitative analysis of the controversy, existing policy and viability of alternatives," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 13(3), pages 453-472, September.
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. 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).
    9. 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.
    10. Théodore Nikiema & Eugène C. Ezin & Sylvain Kpenavoun Chogou, 2023. "Bibliometric Analysis of the State of Research on Agroecology Adoption and Methods Used for Its Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-18, November.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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).
    14. Hernán Borrero, 2025. "Land Inequality, Farm Size, and Productivity: Insights From Peruvian Agriculture," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 56(5), pages 839-849, September.
    15. Pablo Quintana & Marcos Herrera-Gómez, 2025. "Redefining Regions in Space and Time: A Deep Learning Method for Spatio-Temporal Clustering," Working Papers 368, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    16. Will Chancellor, 2023. "Exploring the relationship between information and communication technology (ICT) and productivity: Evidence from Australian farms," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 67(2), pages 285-302, April.
    17. repec:ags:aaea22:343784 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. 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.
    19. 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).
    20. 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).
    21. Maurer, Rainer, 2023. "Comparing the effect of different agricultural land-use systems on biodiversity," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8461-:d:1754237. 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.