Economic development, international food and feed demand, and government policies have converted Brazil’s natural ecosystems into agricultural land. The Integrated Farm System Model (IFSM) was evaluated using production, economic, and weather data collected on two cooperating farms in the Legal Amazon and Cerrado biomes in the Midwest state of Mato Grosso, Brazil. Three sustainable agricultural intensification strategies, namely grain supplementation, pasture re-seeding, and pasture fertilization were simulated in IFSM with double the beef cattle stocking density compared to extensive grazing. Livestock dry matter consumption simulated in IFSM was similar for pasture grazing estimates and actual feed consumed by beef cattle on the two collaborating farms. Grain supplementation best balanced beef production and profitability with lower carbon footprint compared to extensive grazing, followed by pasture fertilization and pasture re-seeding. However, pasture re-seeding and fertilization had greater use of water and energy and more nitrogen losses. Human edible livestock feed use was greatest for grain supplementation compared to other modeled systems. While grain supplementation appears more favorable economically and environmentally, greater use of human edible livestock feed may compete with future human food needs. Pasture intensification had greater human edible feed conversion efficiency, but its greater natural resource use may be challenging.

The intensification of Brazil's beef cattle production system can involve different strategies to increase beef production while reducing deforestation in the Amazon biome and mitigating climate change. This study economically evaluates a cooperating beef farm in the state of Mato Grosso, Brazil's Amazon biome over three crop years (2015–16 to 2017–18), transitioning from an extensive grazing system to a semi-intensive system using five sustainable agricultural intensification (SAI) practices. These five practices include (1) grain supplementation for cattle, (2) pasture fertilization, (3) pasture re-seeding, (4) crop–livestock integration (CLI) and (5) irrigated and fertilized pasture that is rotationally grazed. The relative costs of these five SAI strategies used on this cooperating farm are compared. The adoption of SAI strategies increased beef productivity 5.7% (228–241 kg live-weight sold per hectare) and gradually improved net farm income by ~130% over the 3 years of transition (−US$94.79 to $29.80 ha−1). Grain supplementation (US$188 ha−1) had the cheapest cost per hectare, followed by pasture fertilization (US$477 ha−1) and pasture reseeding (US$650 ha−1). The most costly practice was in-ground irrigation of fenced rotationally grazed pasture (US$1600 ha−1) with the second most costly being CLI (US$672 ha−1). Despite adoption challenges of these SAI practices, past research confirm these five practices can increase beef productivity and profitability while reducing carbon footprint. Regardless of the cost per hectare of each practice, farmer adoption can be improved through education, support and incentives from both the public and private sectors.