Naturaleza y Sociedad. Desafíos Medioambientales

Nat. Soc.: Desafíos Medioambient. | eISSN 2805-8631

Establishment of silvopastoral systems in the south of the department of Atlántico, a strategy to mitigate climate change and contribute to food security

No. 10 (2024-11-29)
  • Ángela Rocío Vásquez-Urriago
    Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria – Agrosavia (Colombia)
    ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5487-2950
  • Gregorio Zambrano-Moreno
    Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria – Agrosavia (Colombia)
    ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5939-0902
  • Ricardo José Henríquez Crespo
    Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria – Agrosavia (Colombia)
    ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9296-1666
  • María Margarita Ramírez-Gómez
    Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria – Agrosavia (Colombia)
    ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7407-7321
  • Marisol González González
    Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria – Agrosavia (Colombia)
    ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9027-8900
  • Leddy Ropero Barbosa
    Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria – Agrosavia (Colombia)
    ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8177-219X
  • Marie-Hélène Dabat-Partiot
    Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement, CIRAD (Francia)
    ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9938-1792
https://doi.org/10.53010/nys10.05

Abstract

Silvopastoral systems (SPSs) in the south of the department of Atlántico (Colombia) emerged as a strategy for productive reconstruction and adaptation to climate change in response to the floods caused by the winter wave between 2010 and 2011, which affected an agricultural area of more than 35,000 hectares in the six municipalities of this region. Between 2012 and 2013, SPSs were established on 2,683 hectares on 778 smallholder farms. The monitoring conducted in the last seven years (2017-2023), using AGROSAVIA’s Social Balance methodology, indicated that at least 10% of the area of the initially established SPSs is maintained and that some farms expanded the areas. With these SPSs, producers achieved a significant increase in milk production (more than five times the production obtained in the traditional extensive livestock system, which is the alternative production system that prevails in the region), thus obtaining an additional economic benefit estimated at 4 million pesos (2023 COP constant) per hectare/year, on average during the period. According to the perception of the producers who have SPS and the observation made on their farms during field visits and interviews, significant environmental impacts were identified—such as improvement in soil conservation and quality and reduction in the use of chemical synthesis inputs—and social impacts—such as income generation and greater availability, quality, and safety of food (milk and meat)—which would indicate a contribution of this strategy to climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as to the food security of producers in the south of the department of Atlántico. It is imperative to learn from this experience to improve and deepen processes to get closer to a transformation toward sustainable livestock farming in Colombia.

Keywords: climate change, food security, environmental impact, social impact, silvopastoral systems

References

Alderete, S. y Aybar, V. (2021). Propuesta metodológica para la evaluación del impacto multidimensional de una innovación tecnológica. Estudio de caso: Riego por Goteo. Ediciones INTA, Serie Estudios socioeconómicos de la sustentabilidad de los sistemas de producción y recursos naturales.

Alonso, J. (2011). Los sistemas silvopastoriles y su contribución al medio ambiente. Revista Cubana de Ciencia Agrícola, 45(2), 107-115.

Alvarado, O. M., Ramírez, U. D., García, T. D., Vargas, C. G., Bermúdez, G. H., Castellanos, G. S., Amor, B. H., Blanco, C. y Henao-Calad, M. (2019). El renacer del Sur: Todo es mejor. Next Print.

Arciniegas-Torres, S. P. y Flórez-Delgado, D. F. (2018). Estudio de los sistemas silvopastoriles como alternativa para el manejo sostenible de la ganadería. Ciencia y Agricultura, 15(2), 107-116.

Baron, G. y Monnier, E. (2003). Une approche pluraliste et participative : Coproduire l'évaluation avec la société civile. Informations Sociales, 110, 120-129.

Blundo-Canto, G., Rodríguez-Borray, G., Vásquez-Urriago, Á., Ramírez-Gómez, M., Zambrano-Moreno, G., Tibaduiza-Castañeda, L., Huertas-Carranza, B., Santacruz-Castro, A., Agudelo-Choicontá, B., Soullier, G., Proietti, C., Mejía-Mejía, A., Ferré, M. y Romemont, A. (2023). Impact Weaving: An Approach to Strengthening the Plausibility of Anticipated AR4D Impact Pathways. European Journal of Development Research, 35, 402–425. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-022-00566-6

Blundo-Canto, G., Triomphe, B., Faure, G., Barret, D., De Romemont, A. y Hainzelin, E. (2019). Building a culture of impact in an international agricultural research organization: Process and reflective learning. Research Evaluation, 28(2), 136-144. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvy033

Cadena P., A. M., Riascos D., M. E., Castro J., A., Delgado S., A. M., Zambrano M., G., y Vásquez-Urriago, Á. R. (2022). Impacto de las variedades Obonuco Andina y San Isidro en el departamento de Nariño, Colombia. Revista de Investigaciones Altoandinas, 24(4), 257-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.18271/ria.2022.452

Cajas, S. (2013). Mejoramiento de la producción de alimentos mediante el escalamiento de sistemas silvopastoriles asociados en su primera fase con cultivos transitorios. Informe final de Proyecto. Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria.

Chará, J., Reyes, E., Peri, P., Otte, J., Arce, E. y Schneider, F. (2020). Sistemas silvopastoriles y su contribución al uso eficiente de los recursos y a los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible: Evidencia desde América Latina. CIPAV, FAO y Agri Benchmark, Editorial CIPAV.

Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (Cepal). (2012). Valoración de daños y pérdidas. Ola invernal en Colombia, 2010-2011. Misión BID - Cepal.

Contreras-Santos, J. L., Martínez-Atencia, J., Cadena-Torres, J. y Falla-Guzmán, C. K. (2019). Evaluación del carbono acumulado en suelo en sistemas silvopastoriles del Caribe colombiano. Agronomía Costarricense, 44(1), 29-41. https://doi.org/10.15517/rac.v44i1.39999

Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria (Corpoica). (2014). Plan de ampliación de las acciones de Corpoica para mitigar el impacto de las inundaciones sobre la agricultura colombiana: Estrategia corporativa en el manejo de la ola invernal 2010-2011. Informe de resultados.

De Janvry, A., Dustan, A. y Sadoulet, E. (2011). Recent Advances in Impact Analysis Methods for Ex-post Impact Assessments of Agricultural Technology: Options for the CGIAR. University of California at Berkeley. Disponible en https://hdl.handle.net/10568/117649

De Jong, S. P. L., van Arensbergen, P., Daemen, F., van der Meulen, B. y van den Besselaar, P. (2011). Evaluation of research in context: An approach and two cases. Research Evaluation, 20(1), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X12941371876346

Días, A., Stachetti, R. y Vedovoto, G. (2008). Avaliação dos impactos de tecnologias geradas pela Embrapa: Metodologia de referencia. Embrapa Informação Tecnológica.

Douthwaite, B. y Hoffecker, E. (2017). Towards a complexity-aware theory of change for participatory research programs working within agricultural innovation systems. Agricultural Systems, 155, 88-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2017.04.002

Ekboir, J., Blundo C., G. y Sette, C. (2017). Knowing what research organizations actually do, with whom, where, how and for what purpose: Monitoring research portfolios and collaborations. Evaluation and Program Planning, 61, 64-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.12.002

Faure, G., Barret, D., Blundo-Canto, G., Dabat, M.-H., Devaux-Spatarakis, A., Le Guerroué, J.-L., Marquié, C., Mathé, S., Temple, L., Toillier, A., Triomphe, B. y Hainzelin, E. (2018). How different agricultural research models contribute to impacts: Evidence from 13 case studies in developing countries. Agricultural Systems, 165, 128-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.06.002

Filho, L. C. D., Carvalho, Í. C. S. D., Mendes, C. M. I., Nacimento, R. A. y Vieira, L. M. (2022). Assessing smallholder farmers' perception of value creation and appropriation in sustainable production. International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development, 22(2), 226-253. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESD.2022.10052369

Foray, D., Mowery, D. C. y Nelson, R. R. (2012). Public R&D and social challenges: What lessons from mission R&D programs? Research Policy, 41(10), 1697-1702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.07.011

Fritzen C., C., Schreiber, D. y Schmitt F., P. (2024). Bioeconomics applied to organic agriculture enhance social and environmental impact of Brazilian properties. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26, 26085-26113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03718-8

Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., Pretty, J., Robinson, S., Thomas, S. M. y Toulmin, C. (2010). Food security: The challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science, 327(5967), 812–818. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1185383

Jara-Rojas, R., Russy, S., Roco, L., Fleming-Muñoz, D. y Engler, A. (2020). Factors affecting the adoption of agroforestry practices: Insights from silvopastoral systems of Colombia. Forests, 11(6), 648. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11060648

Joly, P. B. y Matt, M. (2022). Towards a new generation of research impact assessment approaches. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 47(3), 621-631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9601-0

Klerkx, L., van Mierlo, B. y Leeuwis, C. (2012). Evolution of systems approaches to agricultural innovation: Concepts, analysis, and interventions. En Darnhofer, I., Gibbon, D. y Dedieu, B. (eds.), Farming systems research into the 21st century: The new dynamic (pp. 457–483). Springer, Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4503-2_20

Kline, S. J. y Rosenberg, N. (1986). An overview of innovation. En Landau, R., y Rosenberg, N. (eds.), The positive sum strategy: Harnessing technology for economic (pp. 275–305). National Academy Press, Washington. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814273596_0009

Laperche, B., Uzunidis, D. y von Tunzelmann, G. N. (eds.). (2008). The genesis of innovation: Systemic linkages between knowledge and the market. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Leeuwis, C., Klerkx, L. y Schut, M. (2018). Reforming the research policy and impact culture in the. Integrating science and systemic capacity development. Global Food Security, 16, 17-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.06.002

López-Vigoa, O., Sánchez-Santana, T., Iglesias-Gómez, J. M., Lamela-López, L., Soca-Pérez, M., Arece-García, J. y Milera-Rodríguez, M. (2017). Los sistemas silvopastoriles como alternativa para la producción animal sostenible en el contexto actual de la ganadería tropical. Pastos y Forrajes, 40(2), 83-95. ISSN 0864-0394.

Lundvall, B. A. Y Lema, R. (2014). Growth and structural change in Africa: Development strategies for the learning economy. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 6(5), 455–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2014.979660

Martínez-García, C. G., Dorward, P. y Rehman, T. (2013). Factors influencing adoption of improved grassland management by small-scale dairy farmers in central Mexico and the implications for future research on smallholder adoption in developing countries. Livestock Science, 152(2-3), 228-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2012.10.007

Mayne, J. (2001). Addressing attribution through contribution analysis: Using performance measures sensibly. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 16(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.016.001

Morgan, J. M., Manville, C. y Chataway, J. (2022). Learning from the UK's research impact assessment exercise: A case study of a retrospective impact assessment exercise and questions for the future. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 47(3), 722-746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9608-6

Morton, S. (2015). Progressing research impact assessment: A contributions approach. Research Evaluation, 24(4), 405-419. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv016

Murgueitio, E., Uribe, F., Molina, C., Molina, E., Galindo, W., Chará, J., Flores, M., Giraldo, C., Cuartas, C., Naranjo, J., Solarte, L. y González, J. (2016). Establecimiento y manejo de sistemas silvopastoriles intensivos con leucaena. Editorial CIPAV.

Portilla P., D., Barragán H., W., Carvajal B., C. T., Cajas G., Y. S. y Rivero E., S. T. (2015). Establecimiento de sistemas silvopastoriles para la región Caribe. Corpoica.

Ridde, V. (2006). Suggestions d'améliorations d'un cadre conceptuel de l'évaluation participative. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 21(2), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.21.001

Rodrigues, G. S., Campanhola, C. y Kitamura, P. C. (2002). Avaliação de impacto ambiental da inovação tecnológica agropecuária: Um sistema de avaliação para o contexto institucional de P&D. Cadernos de Ciência & Tecnologia, 19(3), 349-375.

Rodrigues, G. S., Oliveira, P., Novaes, R., Pereira, S., Nicodemo, M., Sena, A., Belchior, E., Almeida, M., Santi, A. y Wruck, F. J. (2017). Avaliação de impactos ambientais de sistemas de integração lavoura-pecuária-floresta conforme contexto de adoção. Documentos, 110, 1-38. Embrapa Meio Ambiente.

Röling, N. (2009). Pathways for impact: Scientists' different perspectives on agricultural innovation. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 7(2), 83-94. https://doi.org/10.3763/ijas.2009.0043

Sánchez, A. (2011). Después de la inundación. Coyuntura Económica: Investigación Económica y Social, 41(2), 213-246.

Sandoval, D. F., Florez, J. F., Enciso, K. J., Sotelo, M. E.,y Stefan, B. (2023). Economic-environmental assessment of silvo-pastoral systems in Colombia: An ecosystem service perspective. Heliyon, 9(8), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19082

Schinato, F., Munka, M. C., Olmos, V. M. y Bussoni, A. T. (2023). Microclimate, forage production and carbon storage in a eucalypt-based silvopastoral system. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 344, 108290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2022.108290

Sepúlveda, J. E., Salles-Filho, S., Bin, A. y Avila, A. F. (2015). Evaluación de impacto de proyectos y giras de innovación de FIA. Fundación para la Innovación Agraria (FIA), Chile.

Smith, M. M., Bentrup, G., Kellerman, T., MacFarland, K., Straight, R., Ameyaw, L. y Stein, S. (2022). Silvopasture in the USA: A systematic review of natural resource professional and producer-reported benefits, challenges, and management activities. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 326, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107818

Souza, C., Ventura, J., De Muner, L., Sangali, C., Silva, D. y Batista, R. (2024). Impactos ambientales, socioeconómicos y tecnológicos de la viticultura familiar en una región de clima cálido en el estado de Espírito Santo, Brasil. Estudios Rurales, 14(30). https://doi.org/10.48160/22504001er30.526

Temple, L., Barret, D., Blundo C., G., Dabat, M. H., Devaux-Spatarakis, A., Faure, G., Hainzelin, E., Mathé, S., Toillier, A. y Triomphe, B. (2018). Assessing impacts of agricultural research for development: A systemic model focusing on outcomes. Research Evaluation, 27(2), 157-170. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvy005

Touzard, J.-M., Temple, L., Faure, G. y Triomphe, B. (2015). Innovation systems and knowledge communities in the agriculture and agrifood sector: A literature review. Journal of Innovation Economics & Management, 17(2), 117-142. https://doi.org/10.3917/jie.017.0117

Tschopp, M., Ceddia, M. G. y Inguaggiato, C. (2022). Adoption of sustainable silvopastoral practices in Argentina's Gran Chaco: A multilevel approach. Journal of Arid Environments, 197, 104657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2021.104657

Unidad Nacional para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres - Colombia (UNGRD). (2015). Plan Estratégico de Cooperación Internacional: Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres 2015-2018. Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Agencia Presidencial de Cooperación, Unidad Nacional para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres. Bogotá: Imprenta Nacional de Colombia.

Walker, T., Ryan, J. y Kelley, T. (2010). Impact assessment of policy-oriented international agricultural research: Evidence and insights from case studies. World Development, 38(10), 1453-1461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.06.005

Wallace, M. y Rafols, I. (2015). Research portfolio analysis in science policy: Moving from financial returns to societal benefits. Minerva, 53, 89-115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-015-9271-8

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Ángela Rocío Vásquez-Urriago, Gregorio Zambrano-Moreno, Ricardo José Henríquez Crespo, María Margarita Ramírez-Gómez, Marisol González González, Leddy Ropero Barbosa, Marie-Hélène Dabat-Partiot

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.