In intensive livestocksystems, high re- productive rhythms are sought (using hor- monal treatments) and practices of feed- ing, replacement, and culling support and orientate the reproductive performances of females, as well as their survival. For species characterised by long reproduc- tive cycles (i.e. cattle), as well as for those with short but accelerated cycles (i.e. sheep), reproductive patterns tend to be very close to physiological limits [33, 56]. In fact, intervals between successive par- turitions impose very short resting periods. Thus, biological regulations of the di ﬀerent functions are highly stimulated and work interdependently because of the rapid suc- cession or even overlap of diﬀerent phys- iological states. So these regulations can lead to disruptive states after which one of the functions associated with reproduction (fertility, milk production) is altered. Such a response can then be interpreted, for the breeder, as insuﬃcient adaptive abilities of the animal, and for the female, as a strat- egy to survive. Insofar as females unable to adapt to such accelerations in rhythm are usually culled, physiological processes favouring the survival of the individual to the detriment of its investment in the following generation, are not activated in such intensive systems. High milking dairy
Gil 6 , Laurens Klerkx 7 , Marc Moraine 8 , Caitlin A. Peterson 9 , Júlio César dos Reis 10 and Judson F. Valentim 11
ABSTRACT. Crop and livestock production have become spatially decoupled in existing commercial agricultural regimes throughout the world. These segregated high input production systems contribute to some of the world’s most pressing sustainability challenges, including climate change, nutrient imbalances, water pollution, biodiversity decline, and increasingly precarious rural livelihoods. There is substantial evidence that by closing the loop in nutrient and energy cycles, recoupling crop and livestocksystems at farm and territorial scales can help reduce the environmental externalities associated with conventional commercial farming without declines in profitability or yields. Yet such “integrated” crop and livestocksystems remain rare as a proportion of global agricultural area. Based on an interdisciplinary workshop and additional literature review, we provide a comprehensive historical and international perspective on why integrated crop and livestocksystems have declined in most regions and what conditions have fostered their persistence and reemergence in others. We also identify levers for encouraging the reemergence of integrated crop and livestocksystems worldwide. We conclude that a major disruption of the current regime would be needed to foster crop-livestock reintegration, including a redesign of research programs, credit systems, payments for ecosystem services, insurance programs, and food safety regulations to focus on whole farm outcomes and the creation of a circular economy. An expansion of the number of integrated crop and livestocksystems field trials and demonstrations and efforts to brand integrated crop and livestocksystems as a form of sustainable agriculture through the development of eco-labels could also improve adoption, but would likely be unsuccessful at encouraging wide-scale change without a more radical transformation of the research and policy landscape.
This study is focused on the resilience of the livestocksystems in peri-urban areas. Here, we define the peri-urban farming system as the farming system that is located close to the urban area. Especially the study is interested in the beef cattle production performed around urban areas.
Livestocksystems in peri-urban areas have been particularly affected by global and local disturbances. Global challenges depend on the global market dynamics, the socio-political and environmental development, such as the economic crisis and raw material price volatility, or the climate change. In this framework, the abolition of the quota system in 2015 was subsequent to a rise in the milk production in the European Union and a consequent decrease of the prices and profits for the farmers [ 10 ]. The emergence of periodic global food safety crises such as Avian influenza or Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), had strong consequences locally on the farming systems, especially on the cattle production, at the same time as alarming the public. As assessed by the OECD [ 11 ], in Europe, the meat consumption severely plunged in the early 2000s, and since 2013 it seemed to rise but at a slow and inconstant pace. At the same time in the European Union, the prices for cattle production record a decreasing tendency from 2010 to 2019 [ 12 ].
The vulnerability of a given system corresponds to its susceptibility to be harmed, reflecting its inability to cope with adverse effects. This inability is the consequence of three key parameters that are interconnected, the sensitivity, the exposure and the adaptive capacity of the system in front of adverse effect. At the farming systems scale, some authors tried to understand links between sensitivity, exposure, while others focused on a conceptual analysis of adaptive capacity without proposing a quantification of the level of vulnerability. Other authors propose a measurement of vulnerability based on the evaluation of farming systems characteristics, as if the factors explaining vulnerability where yet known. In this paper, we first propose quantitative indicators for the three key parameters of vulnerability. Then, we apply our framework to mixed crop-livestocksystems and we show that various levels of vulnerability should be explained by both some characteristics of the systems and strategies of farmers. Low vulnerable systems are more diversified, with one additional production unit and significantly higher sales of transformed products on average (+1.5 points of percentage in comparison with moderate vulnerable systems). A lower dependency to markets through better feed management (lower stocking rate) and a higher efficiency in energy and water consumption are also key determinants of low vulnerability. This management permits having bigger farms (+43 to 20 hectares) and higher flock sizes (+13 livestock units on average). The ability to cope with adverse effect is not significantly different between stable, non-stable, flexible and rigid farming systems. Our findings are a first step toward a better understanding of farming systems vulnerability: their validation on another sample would help contributing to the conception of innovative farming systems in research and to better advices for vulnerable farmers in operational projects.
Policy-makers at European and regional levels are keen to encourage more sustainable livestocksystems, especially to reduce their environmental impacts and to enhance ecosystem services (ES). This strategy encompasses max- imising provision of ES by farms (Power 2010 ). In a farming context, three main types of ES are distinguished (Swinton et al. 2007 ; Zhang et al. 2007 ): (i) services from agriculture, that is, provisioning services (e.g. forage or milk), (ii) non-market services, some authors distinguish- ing regulating services (e.g. C storage) and cultural ser- vices (e.g. attractive landscapes), and (iii) services to agriculture, that is, several supporting and regulating ser- vices called ‘input services’ (Le Roux et al. 2008 ) because they allow a decrease in chemical inputs. Better under- standing of trade-offs and synergies among services rela- tive to their beneficiaries (e.g. farmers, society) is essential for management and policy decisions (Fisher et al. 2009 ). Studying services provision, trade-offs and synergies in grassland-based livestocksystems raises several issues. First, services are scale-dependent (Lavorel & Grigulis
of herd configuration. Dairy farmers can thus stabilize herd milk supply throughout the year by managing a diversity of lactation stages. With seasonal species such as goat, this can be done in spite of the innate reproductive seasonality, in particular through the use of daylight treatments. In others cases, the variability is an involuntarily consequence of herd management, mediated by the interaction with animal biology. For instance, the feeding plan, decided at a herd or group level, can create discrepancies between animal requirements and nutrient supply at the individual level. Interestingly, different feeding options can lead to the same level of efficiency but it involves different levels of biological solicitation (Puillet et al., 2011), thereby increasing the risk of involuntarily culling. In the past, individual variability was frequently considered as a positive attribute only for extensive systems, in particular with the use of different species (Tichit et al., 2004). Nowadays, there is a growing interest to study the advantages of managing individual variability in a larger spectrum of management situations (Tichit et al., 2011), including mono-specific intensive systems (André et al., 2010). The study of individual variability may thus benefit from the considerations of genetic differences and their change by the mean of genetic selection. A second mechanism concerns the cumulative long-term effects. It underpins the fact that effects of short-term decisions may not be reflected instantaneously in animal responses but only after certain time decay. Body reserves have an important role in these effects as they constitute the energetic capital that animals can either use to buffer nutrient variations in the environment or build to anticipate its use during high energy- demanding periods of their reproductive cycle, like in early lactation. Therefore, a strong biological investment during the current reproductive cycle, in terms of high mobilization or a low deposition of body reserves, can impair the performances of the future reproductive cycle (Walsh et al., 2011). There are feeding options which can take advantage of this capacity, especially for improving lifetime productivity (Rufino et al., 2009).
Université Clermont Auvergne, AgroParisTech, Inra, Irstea, VetAgro Sup, UMR Territoires, F-63000 Clermont–Ferrand, France
Intensive livestock farming is receiving considerable criticism, especially in Europe where the current systems are asso- ciated with low animal welfare and negative environmental impacts. For several years, the research agenda has been targeting ways to increase the sustainability of livestocksystems, that is, to improve their societal and environmental performances without decreasing the economic outcome, in other words to design multi-performant systems. The central message of this text is that the ef ﬁcient way to achieve this goal is to combine both agro-ecology and digital sciences.
Renaud Lancelot 7,8 & caroline coste 7,8
in the dominant livestocksystems of Sahelian countries herds have to move across territories. their mobility is often a source of conflict with farmers in the areas crossed, and helps spread diseases such as Rift Valley fever. Knowledge of the routes followed by herds is therefore core to guiding the implementation of preventive and control measures for transboundary animal diseases, land use planning and conflict management. However, the lack of quantitative data on livestock movements, together with the high temporal and spatial variability of herd movements, has so far hampered the production of fine resolution maps of animal movements. This paper proposes a general framework for mapping potential paths for livestock movements and identifying areas of high animal passage potential for those movements. the method consists in combining the information contained in livestock mobility networks with landscape connectivity, based on different mobility conductance layers. We illustrate our approach with a livestock mobility network in Senegal and Mauritania in the 2014 dry and wet seasons.
Livestocksystems occupy approximately 35 percent of the global ice-free land area: 3.4 billion ha of grasslands and rangelands, and 350 million ha of feed crops (Foley et al., 2011). These systems are a significant global asset with a value of at least US$1.4 trillion, and are also important for livelihoods. More than 800 million poor people depend on livestock farming for their survival and the sector contributes to the employment of at least 20 percent of the world’s population (Herrero et al., 2013). Ruminants are able to produce food on non-arable lands (because of slope, elevation and climate) and to transform resources not used for human consumption, such as grass and fodder, into edible products. However, using highly productive croplands to produce animal feed, even efficiently, reduces the potential world supply of food calories (Foley et al., 2011). Keeping livestock acts as insurance and is an essential risk reduction strategy for vulnerable communities, while also providing nutrients and traction for growing crops in smallholder systems. Meat, milk and eggs provide 18 percent of calories for human consumption and close to 35 percent of essential proteins and micronutrients (e.g. vitamins, minerals, unsaturated fatty acids) (Herrero et al., 2013). However, there are large differences in meat and milk consumption between rich and poor countries.
4. Leverages to enhance flexibility in livestocksystems 4.1. Different levers according to scale
Aaker and Mascarenhas  focusing on the means to enhance organizational flexibility outlined the following four levers centred on products, resources and management: (i) diversification of processes, business activities and products, running from broadening the range but also including activity in different marketplaces and extended use of different process technologies. In Ref. , the authors assert their notion of “relational flexibility” to account for the sources of adaptive capacity employed by livestock farmers through their marketing networks and the circuits they build or exploit to sell livestock; (ii) increasing inter‐ independence between production units; (iii) developing a base of potentially useful resources that are deployed not continually but on a case‐by‐case basis “should the need arise”: func‐ tional redundancies, latent competencies, room for manoeuvre; (iv) minimizing workflow specialization, steering away from situations where tasks are accomplished by staff who have competencies deemed “necessary and sufficient” to complete the task. For example, Madel‐ rieux et al.  clearly illustrate the flexibility achievable by a more collective workplace organization and workload breakdown in livestock farming systems.
(banana and sugarcane leaves) and manure used for organic
fertilization (Archimède et al. 2014 ; Sierra et al. 2013 ). Due
to the effective cost of manual labor, and the level of equipment required to manage a large amount of biomass, collective ini- tiatives, driven by the most integrated sectors (i.e., banana, sug- arcane, or cattle), could be a sound solution to improve the reutilization of crop residues and manure and, by consequence, the self-sufficiency and efficiency of mixed farming systems. The situation of G1 and G2 is rather different. They are very small (less than 3 ha) and diversified and implement more crop- livestock integration practices than other cases in the same re- gion. Agroecological transition, in these cases, could consist of balancing more nutrients between crops and livestocksystems in order to optimize the valorization of manure according to crop requirements and by cropping forages to feed their small livestocksystems, in order to decrease input dependency at system level while improving productivity.
Furthermore, cattle population in the Northern highlands is strongly affected by diseases and high mortality rate in the winter due to poor health care service as well as feed shortage, especially for cattle grazing in the natural pasture in the hill tops (Huyen et al., 2011). Smallholders in the uplands of Vietnam are mostly dependent on natural pastures for cattle feeding. In the high altitude areas, each family usually owns between two and five heads of cattle. Pastoral systems are characterized by multi‐functions of livestock that contrast with the vision of commercial firms invested in the development of mono‐cropping maize production or pig intensive rearing. These important multi‐functions of extensive livestock need to be taken into account for assessing the functions of grasslands in local communities. Free‐ grazing and tethered grazing are the main feeding systems, in which cattle are generally grazed every day on natural pastures in the forest land far from the homestead with little or no use of crop‐by products (Mui, 2003; Huyen et al., 2006; Phung, 2009). However, there is a lack of information on quantitative and qualitative of grass in the pastures. Phong (1995) and Mui (2003) reported that Northern Mountainous Regions and the middle highlands occupy more than half of the total grassland in Vietnam. However, the grazing area is declining due to crop production, re‐ settlement or reforestation programmes. As a result, available native pastures tend to be overgrazed and there is little formal grazing management until now.
ABSTRACT. In North Cameroon, livestock farming systems are hampered by high pressure on land while high population growth stimulates the development of beef markets. This study was conducted to identify the interactions between development of beef market, livestock farming systems and marketing channels dynamics. The methodological approach used was organized around three axes: territory, market channel and time. Surveys and annual follow‐up related to beef supply of the town of Garoua were conducted at the level of herds, farms, cattle markets, slaughter‐houses and consumers. Stockbreeders’ practices are constrained by environmental characteristics and the way in which they react to threats and opportunities. Stockbreeders are sensitive to market, but their engagement in trading is carried out carefully. Stockbreeders prefer minimization of risks to optimization of income. Market influence is more on speculations than transformation of breeding practices. Productivity of livestock farming systems is lower than the demographic growth rate. The improvement of technical performance is profitable only when it is followed with good negotiation and decision making skills. It is imperative to develop support services to farmers: counselling, enhanced organisational capacities, access to farm inputs and credit. Suitable policies are necessary to improve accessibility and availability to fodder resources. It is important to create conducive environment for farmers, with a fair and inciting functioning of cattle marketing channels. A beef supply model of Garoua is proposed. Scenarios derived from allow to understand stakes of food security and the future of livestock farming systems.
Jean-Yves Dourmad, Christian Ducrot, Muriel Tichit and Bertrand Dumont
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), France
In the current complex globalized world, marked by deep economic and financial crises, civil conflicts, massive human movements, negative and unpredicted effects of climate change, extinction of natural species, loss of biodiversity, ecosystems and agricultural lands, and the decline of the “fossil energy era”, the human being assist to challenges as never before. In a finite planet, at the same time that we assist to exceptional technological progresses, the polarization of richness and poverty paradoxically continues to rise and the increase of global population is followed by an exponential increase in food demands. The world is more hunger than ever and the planet already said basta due to its evident limits in the natural resource base. In this context, we must take party when deciding our best options for the future and, for the agricultural sector development (highly concerned with the global food security goals) there is a large consensus that future trends must seriously consider current worries issues in terms of economic pertinence, environment conservation and societal exigencies. The agroecology provides a pertinent framework for fulfilling those objectives. By taking into account viewpoints coming from the large range of stakeholders implied in the food chain the agroecological thinking consider the human being in the centre of the system and put forward knowledge, traditions and iterative, dynamics feedbacks, rather than relying on dependencies from technological packages and external inputs like in the green revolution era. However, whereas is strongly judged and criticized, the animal sector has been largely ignored in the agroecological debate, despite its strong presence and role in the rural landscapes,. The emphasis has been done in the agricultural sector. Therefore, trying to contribute to fill this gap, a multidisciplinary team at INRA (France) carried out a deep and conscientious work looking for i) defining and establishing the main principles on which animal production systems (APS) would have to focus for achieving the required agroecological transition (Dumont et al., 2013) and ii) proposing priority research issues deserving further attention by the animal science community (Dumont et al., 2014). That work was based on a) sounds literature reviews for updating the current state of the art and b) fruitful outputs coming from several brainstorming and feedbacks sessions in interaction with the scientific community. Thus, five principles were proposed based on keywords like connecting and integrate, recycle, be autonomous, be clean and protect and defend natural and cultural richness. The 5 principles calls for
The Argentinean Traceability System 3
Fanny Lange, Cirad
In Argentina, since the year 2003, a system of individual animal identification and management was adopted and used for traceability. This system will reinforce group identification thanks to tattoos already used for cattle. The system was developed with the objective of complying with European Union demands, considering the importance of that market and its significance in its contribution to the value chain. We understand that traceability is a tool that, by means of suit- able cattle identification, contributes to the improvement of information on stock and to a use- ful knowledge of the dynamics of national livestock, allowing to improve the national sanitary system as well as to control commercial aspects. Although the individual identification system was conceived for cattle intended to be exported, it has been decided to expand the system to the whole national herd, from the individualisation of new-born calves -which will progressively be incorporated as of the year 2007, until full replacement and identification.
Low vulnerable farming systems with the profiles “ No evolution ” • 24% of the most vulnerable systems have shown adaptive capacity but not
sufficiently to be considered as « low vulnerable » farming systems
Vulnerable farming systems with the profiles “ Moderate evolution ”, “ High evolution ”
Following immediately the onset of the crisis, two broadly announced phenomena, whose arrival never seemed to materialize on the Uruguayan scene, appeared. Firstly, China quickly appeared as a commercial partner. It became the main trad‐ ing partner for almost all products globally by the middle of the 2010s. Secondly, genetically modified organisms promoted a type of large‐scale agriculture that in the south of South America formed unique dynamics at global level. In Uruguay, the phenomenon is minuscule compared to what happened in its big neighbors, Brazil and Argentina, and even Paraguay. However, there is a situation that could be unique in history. For the first time the productive structure of an agricultural product, i.e. soybean, is similar to what has been observed in other sectors; only a few actors represent a very large portion of the global activity. In the case of Uru‐ guay, 10 companies account for 50% of the production, a situation unheard of up to now in terms of agricultural production. In our analysis, and in terms of social impact and environmental sustainability, it is important to highlight that livestock has been progressively excluded from areas with good agricultural potential, in which it had always been present.