Farm typology analysis and technology assessment: An application in an arid region of South Asia

Kumar, Surendra; Craufurd, Peter; Haileslassie, Amare; Ramilan, Thiagarajah; Rathore, Abhishek; Whitbread, Anthony

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104149

Cited by 23 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus households of the study area could be grouped into four farm types contrasted by their structural characteristics that describe resource endowment and functional characteristics that describe livelihood strategies. Traditionally, farm households were divided into four categories based on the size of their land holdings: marginal, small, medium, and large farmer 19 . The typologies created in this study are based on the possession of resources such as crops and animals, as well as decisions made by them regarding crop and livestock rearing.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farm typology of smallholders integrated farming systems in Southern Coastal Plains of Kerala, India

Innazent

Jacob

Bindhu

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adoption of an integrated farming system (IFS) is essential to achieve food and nutritional security in small and marginal holdings. Assessment of IFS to know the resource availability and socio-economic condition of the farm household, farm typology plays a critical role. In this regard, a sample survey of 200 marginal households practicing mixed crop-livestock agriculture was conducted during 2018–2019 at Southern Coastal Plains, which occupies 19,344 ha in Thiruvananthapuram district, Kerala, India. Farming system typology using multivariate statistical techniques of principal component analysis and cluster analysis characterized the diverse farm households coexisting within distinct homogenous farm types. Farming system typology identified four distinct farm types viz. resource constrained type-1 households with small land owned, high abundance of poultry, very low on-farm income, constituted 46.5%; resource endowed type-2 households oriented around fruit and vegetable, plantation crop, with a moderate abundance of large ruminant and poultry, high on-farm income, constituted 12.5%; resource endowed type-3 household oriented around food grain, extensive use of farm machinery, with a moderate abundance of large ruminant, low on-farm income, constituted 21.5%; and resource endowed type-4 household oriented around fodder, with high abundance of large ruminant, medium on-farm income, constituted 19.5% of sampled households. Constraint analysis using constraint severity index assessed the severity of constraints in food grain, horticulture, livestock, complementary and supplementary enterprises in each farm type, which allowed targeted farming systems interventions to be envisaged to overcome soil health problems, crops and animal production constraints. Farming system typology together with constraint analysis are therefore suggested as a practical framework capable of identifying type-specific farm households for targeted farming systems interventions.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farm typology of smallholders integrated farming systems in Southern Coastal Plains of Kerala, India

Innazent

Jacob

Bindhu

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conventionally the farm HHs were classified mainly only on the basis of the size of land holding in possession, i.e. marginal, small, semi-medium, upper-medium, and large farmer 33 . In this study, the typologies are developed based on the possession of assets viz crop, livestock and decisions made by them related the crops and livestock rearing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two multivariate statistical techniques were employed sequentially for generating a typology of the surveyed farm households: Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to reduce the dataset into non-correlated components followed by Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (CA) for partitioning the PCA output into clusters. The approach has been used in many studies to categorize farming systems 33 . All analyses were executed in R (version 3.1.0) with the ade4 package (version 1.6-2, available online at: http://pbil.univ-lyon1.fr/ADE-4/ ) and the cluster package (version 1.15.2).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farm typology for planning targeted farming systems interventions for smallholders in Indo-Gangetic Plains of India

Kaur

Prusty

Ravisankar

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to complexity of smallholder farms, many times technologies with great potential fail to achieve the desired impact in leveraging productivity and profitability of the farming community. In the Indo-Gangetic Plains there is an urgent need to understand the diversity of farm households, identifying the main drivers deciding their system thus, classifying them into homogenous groups. In the present study, the diversity of smallholder farms was assessed using crop, livestock and income related characteristics and associated farm mechanization. Using principal component analysis and cluster analysis for 252 farm households, 4 farm types were identified i.e. Type 1. Small Farm households with cereal-based cropping system and subsistence livestock (39%), Type 2. Small Farm households with diversified cropping system dominated by cereal and fodder crops with only cattle herd (9%), Type 3. Marginal Farm household with diversified cropping system dominated by cash crop and herd comprising of only cattle (39%), Type 4. Marginal Farm household with diversified cropping system dominated by cereal crops and herd dominated by small ruminants (12%). Based on the constraints identified for different components of farming systems, low-cost interventions were planned for each farm type. These interventions have resulted in 84.8–103.2 per cent increase in the income of the farm HH under study suggesting usefulness of typology-based intervention planning in increasing income of small farm holders.

show abstract

“…SIPs are a means toward SAI in achieving food security, social inclusion and environmental sustainability goals. Sustainable intensification pathways can largely be considered as balancing trade-offs between intensification and sustainability across its key dimensions (social, economic, and environmental) and diverse scales (Haileslassie et al, 2016;Kumar et al, 2019). Such an approach can help minimize the probability of hitting a non-beneficial tipping point (Xie et al, 2019) which is a critical point in a situation, process, or system beyond which a significant and often unstoppable effect or change takes place.…”

Section: Sustainable Intensification Pathways In Perspective Of Wider...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gap analysis and methodological framework to assess and develop water centric sustainable agricultural intensification pathways in Sub-Saharan Africa

Haileslassie

Mekuria²,

Uhlenbrook³

et al. 2022

Front. Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sustainable agricultural intensification (SAI) debate, partly rooted in discussions over the Green Revolution, was developed in the 1990s in the context of smallholder agriculture in Africa. In many Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries, production is still largely rainfed, with the prevalence of significant yield gaps and rapid environmental degradation. Projections indicate that climate and demographic changes will further intensify the competition for freshwater resources. Currently, SAI is centered around predominantly rain-fed agricultural systems, often at a farm and plot scales. There has been increased attention to the improved role of agricultural water management (AWM) to address the daunting challenges of climate change, land degradation and food and nutritional insecurity in SSA. Nonetheless, the supporting frameworks and tools remain limited and do not connect the sustainability assessment and the development of intensification pathways (SIP) along multiple scales of the rainfed irrigation continuum. This paper reviews the gaps in concepts and practices of SAI and suggests a methodological framework to design context-specific and water-centered SIP for the SSA region. Accordingly, the proposed methodological framework demonstrates: (a) how to couple sustainability assessment methods to participatory SIPs design and adaptive management approach; (b) how contextualized sustainability domains and indicators can help in AWM centered SIP development; (c) the approaches to handle multiple scales and water-related indicators, the heterogeneity of biophysical and social settings when tailoring technology options to local contexts; and (d) the principles which enable the SIP designs to enable synergies and complementarities of SAI measures to reinforce the rainfed-irrigation continuum. This methodological framework allows researchers to integrate the sustainability assessment and SIP design, and guides policymakers and practitioners in planning, implementing and monitoring SAI initiatives (e.g., Framework for Irrigation Development and Agricultural Water Management in Africa) across multiple scales.

show abstract

Farm typology analysis and technology assessment: An application in an arid region of South Asia

Cited by 23 publications

References 26 publications

Farm typology of smallholders integrated farming systems in Southern Coastal Plains of Kerala, India

Farm typology of smallholders integrated farming systems in Southern Coastal Plains of Kerala, India

Farm typology for planning targeted farming systems interventions for smallholders in Indo-Gangetic Plains of India

Gap analysis and methodological framework to assess and develop water centric sustainable agricultural intensification pathways in Sub-Saharan Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About