Assessing the economic viability of integrated crop−livestock systems in Mato Grosso, Brazil

Abstract

Population growth and rising incomes have led to increasing global demand for meat products. Meeting this demand without converting remaining natural ecosystems or further degrading ecosystems is one of the largest global sustainability challenges. A critical step to overcoming this challenge is to increase the productivity of livestock grazing systems, which occupy the largest land area of any type of agriculture globally. Integrated crop−livestock systems (iCL), which re-couple crop and livestock production at the farm scale, have been considered a promising strategy to tackle this challenge by restoring degraded pasturelands and providing supplemental nutrition to livestock. However, few studies have analyzed the economic viability of such systems, especially in Brazil, an important player in global food systems. This paper presents an economic analysis of iCL in Mato Grosso, Brazil, the largest grain and beef producer in the country, which spans the ecologically diverse Amazon, Cerrado and Pantanal biomes. We compare the economic performance of an integrated soybean/corn and beef cattle system to a continuous crop (soybean/corn) system and a continuous livestock (beef cattle) production system from 2005 to 2012. We use empirical case study data to characterize a ‘typical’ farm for each production system within the study region. We find that the integrated crop−livestock system has a higher annual net present value (NPV) per hectare (ha) than continuous cropping or livestock under a range of discount rates. However, under a scenario of substantially higher crop prices, the continuous cropping outperforms iCL. While iCL is not feasible in all regions of the Amazon and Cerrado, our results indicate that in places where the biophysical and market conditions are suitable for production, it could be a highly profitable way to intensify cattle production and potentially spare land for other uses, including conservation. Nevertheless, additional credit and technical support may be needed to overcome high upfront costs and informational barriers to increase iCL areas as a sustainable development strategy for agriculture in the Amazon and Cerrado regions.

Research Trends in Crop–Livestock Systems: A Bibliometric Review

“…In the “cow–biogas–vegetable” cycle mode, “pig–biogas–maize” cycle mode, “fruit (grass)–pig–biogas–cellar” five-support cycle modes, and similar others, biogas replaced coal for power generation, manure and biogas slurry replaced chemical fertilizers and by doing so, reducing dependency on external resources. In this mode, the proportion of feed cost for cattle and pigs was reduced respectively by 6.79% [ 25 , 39 , 40 ] and 22.47% [ 25 , 39 , 40 ], compared with the traditional farming mode. Each m 3 biogas digester could generate 477.82 kW·h, for an electricity cost of 0.52 RMB/kW·h; saving an electricity cost of 918.88 RMB [ 19 ].…”

Drivers of decoupling and recoupling of crop and livestock systems at farm and territorial scales

“…Additional regime factors arising from decades of retirement including knowledge gaps, supply chain lock-in, and habits of specialization further constrain new-ICLS adoption (Table 1). ICLS are often perceived to have lower profitability and involve higher (and more skilled) labor requirements and upfront costs than specialized systems , even though returns on investment have been shown to be faster and higher than investments in specialized systems (dos Reis et al 2019). In more remote agricultural regions, both perceived and actual gaps for marketing diversified products limit ICLS adoption .…”

Economic viability of a crop-livestock integration system

“…uS dollar quotation in the period 11.01.2016 to 11.01.2017 is R$ 3.20 = uSd1.00 (Source: https://www4.bcb.gov.br/pec/taxas/port/ptaxnpesq.asp?id=txcotacao). (MaGNaBoSCo et al, 2009;laZZaRoTTo et al, 2009;laZZaRoTTo et al, 2010;GaRCIa et al, 2012;PaCheCo et al, 2014;ReIS et al, 2019). MaGNaBoSCo et al (2009) in an investigation of risk associated to ClI system under several scenarios (finished steer vs. bull sale; land lease vs. own land; own capital vs. rural credit), found the probability of negative NPv did not exceed 20%.…”

“…GaRCIa et al (2012) obtained positive economic results for ClI systems in which corn was cultivated in rotation with Panicum and Brachiaria pastures in Mato Grosso do Sul State. In Mato Grosso, ClI systems have also been considered an alternative to mitigate risks, with viable economic results (ReIS et al, 2019). empirical studies involving the analysis of economic viability of ClI systems in the São Paulo state could not be found.…”