Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T22:47:27.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Principles of integrated agricultural systems: Introduction to processes and definition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2008

John R. Hendrickson ,
J.D. Hanson ,
Donald L. Tanaka  and
Gretchen Sassenrath
John R. Hendrickson*
Affiliation:
Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Box 459, Mandan, ND 58554, USA.
J.D. Hanson
Affiliation:
Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Box 459, Mandan, ND 58554, USA.
Donald L. Tanaka
Affiliation:
Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Box 459, Mandan, ND 58554, USA.
Gretchen Sassenrath
Affiliation:
Application and Production Technology Research Unit, Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, 141 Experiment Station Road, Stoneville, MS 38776, USA.
*
*Corresponding author: hendricj@mandan.ars.usda.gov
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Agriculture has been very successful in addressing the food and fiber needs of today's world population. However, there are increasing concerns about the economic, environmental and social costs of this success. Integrated agricultural systems may provide a means to address these concerns while increasing sustainability. This paper reviews the potential for and challenges to integrated agricultural systems, evaluates different agricultural systems in a hierarchical systems framework, and provides definitions and examples for each of the systems. This paper also describes the concept of dynamic-integrated agricultural systems and calls for the development of principles to use in developing and researching integrated agricultural systems. The concepts in this paper have arisen from the first in a series of planned workshops to organize common principles, criteria and indicators across physiographic regions in integrated agricultural systems. Integrated agricultural systems have multiple enterprises that interact in space and time, resulting in a synergistic resource transfer among enterprises. Dynamic-integrated agricultural systems have multiple enterprises managed in a dynamic manner. The key difference between dynamic-integrated agricultural systems and integrated agricultural systems is in management philosophy. In an integrated agricultural system, management decisions, such as type and amount of commodities to produce, are predetermined. In a dynamic-integrated system, decisions are made at the most opportune time using the best available knowledge. We developed a hierarchical scheme for agricultural systems ranging from basic agricultural production systems, which are the simplest system with no resource flow between enterprises, to dynamic-integrated agricultural systems. As agricultural systems move up in the hierarchy, their complexity, amount of management needed, and sustainability also increases. A key aspect of sustainability is the ability to adapt to future challenges. We argue that sustainable systems need built-in flexibility to achieve this goal.

Keywords

agricultural production systemshierarchydynamic-integrated agricultural production systems
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 23 , Special Issue 4: Principles of Integrated Agricultural Systems , December 2008 , pp. 265 - 271
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 FAOSTAT data. 2005. Available at Web site http://faostat.fao.org/faostat/form?collection=Population (updated March 2005).Google Scholar
2 Ruttan, V.W. 1999. The transition to agricultural sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96:5960–5967.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3 Trewavas, A. 2002. Malthus foiled again and again. Nature 418:668–670.Google Scholar
4 Huang, J., Pray, C., and Rozelle, S. 2002. Enhancing the drops to feed the poor. Nature 418:678–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Brummer, E.C. 1998. Diversity, stability and sustainable American agriculture. Agronomy Journal 90:1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 Tilman, D., Cassman, K.G., Matson, P.A., Naylor, R., and Polasky, S. 2002. Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418:671–677.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7 Krall, J.M. and Schuman, G.E. 1996. Integrated dryland crop and livestock production systems on the Great Plains: extent and outlook. Journal of Production Agriculture 9:187–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Heitschmidt, R.K., Short, R.E., and Grings, E.E. 1996. Ecosystems, sustainability, and animal agriculture. Journal of Animal Science 74:1395–1405.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9 Roberts, M.J., Osteen, C., and Soule, M. 2004. Risk, Government Programs, and the Environment. United States Department of Agriculture–Economic Research Service, Technical Bulletin No. 1908. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
10 Hoppe, R.A. and Korb, P. 2005. Large and small farms: trends and characteristics. In: Banker, D.E. and MacDonald, J.M. (eds). Structural and Financial Characteristics of U.S. Farms: 2004 Family Farm Report. United States Department of Agriculture–Economic Research Service, Agricultural Information Bulletin No. 797. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, p. 5–21.Google Scholar
11 Covey, T., Green, R., Jones, C., Johnson, J., Morehart, M., Williams, R., McGath, C., Mishra, A., and Strickland, R. 2005. Agricultural Income and Finance Outlook. Electronic Outlook Report from the Economic Research Service. AIS-83. Available at Web site http://www.ers.usda.gov (accessed 7 November 2005).Google Scholar
12 Entz, M.H., Baron, V.S., Carr, P.M., Meyer, D.W., Smith, S.R. Jr, and McCaughey, W.P. 2002. Potential of forages to diversify cropping systems in the Northern Great Plains. Agronomy Journal 94:240–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13 Schiere, J.B., Ibrahim, M.N.M., and van Keulen, H. 2002. The role of livestock for sustainability in mixed farming: criteria and scenario studies under varying resource allocation. Agricultural Ecosystems and Environment 90:139–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14 Entz, M.H., Bullied, W.J., and Katepa-Mupondwa, F. 1995. Rotational benefits of forage crops in Canadian prairie cropping systems. Journal of Production Agriculture 8:521–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15 Krupinsky, J.M., Bailey, K.L., McMullen, M.P., Gossen, B.D., and Turkington, T.K. 2002. Managing plant disease risk in diversified cropping systems. Agronomy Journal 94:198–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16 Honeyman, M.S. 1996. Sustainability issues of U.S. swine production. Journal of Animal Science 74:1410–1417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17 Oltjen, J.W. and Beckett, J.L. 1996. Role of ruminant livestock in sustainable agricultural systems. Journal of Animal Science 74:1406–1409.Google Scholar
18 Dimitri, C., Effland, A., and Conklin, N. 2005. The 20th Century Transformation of U.S. Agriculture and Farm Policy. Economic Research Service-United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Information Bulletin No. 3.Google Scholar
19 Eltun, R., Korsæth, A., and Nordheim, O. 2002. A comparison of environmental, soil fertility, yield, and economical effects in six cropping systems based on an 8-year experiment in Norway. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 90:155–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20 Haynes, R.J. and Francis, O.S. 1990. Effects of mixed cropping farming systems on changes in soil properties on the Canterbury Plains. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 14:73–81.Google Scholar
21 Coon, R.C., Leistritz, F.L., and Hertsgaard, T.A. 1986. Composition of North Dakota's Economic Base: A Regional Analysis. Department of Agricultural Economics, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND.Google Scholar
22 Luna, J., Allen, V., Fontenot, J., Daniels, L., Vaughan, D., Hagood, S., Taylor, D., and Laub, C. 1994. Whole farm systems research: an integrated crop and livestock systems comparison study. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 9:57–63.Google Scholar
23 Pannell, D.J. 1999. On the estimation of on-farm benefits of agricultural research. Agricultural Systems 61:123–134.Google Scholar
24 Kates, R.W. and Parris, T.M. 2003. Long-term trends and a sustainability transition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100:8062–8067.Google Scholar
25 Kemp, D.R., Girdwood, J., Parton, K.A., and Charry, A.A. 2004. Farm management: rethinking directions. AFBM Journal 1:36–44.Google Scholar
26 Westcott, P.C. and Young, C.E. 2000. U.S. farm program benefits: links to planting decisions and agricultural markets. Economic Research Service–US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Outlook October issue. p. 10–14.Google Scholar
27 Young, C.E. and Westcott, P.C. 2000. How decoupled is U.S. agricultural support for major crops. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 82:762–767.Google Scholar
28 Westcott, P.C., Young, C.E., and Price, J.M. 2002. The 2002 Farm Act: Provisions and Implications for Commodity Markets. Electronic Outlook Report from the Economic Research Service. Available at Web site http://www.ers.usda.gov (accessed 8 November 2005).Google Scholar
29 Tanaka, D.L., Krupinsky, J.M., Liebig, M.A., Merrill, S.D., Ries, R.E., Hendrickson, J.R., Johnson, H.A., and Hanson, J.D. 2002. Dynamic cropping systems: an adaptable approach to crop production in the Great Plains. Agronomy Journal 94:957–961.Google Scholar
30 Wagner, W.C. 1999. Sustainable agriculture: how to sustain a production system in a changing environment. International Journal for Parasitology 29:1–5.Google Scholar
31 Holling, C.S. 2001. Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems 4:390–405.Google Scholar
32 Lyson, T.A. 2002. Advanced agricultural biotechnologies and sustainable agriculture. Trends in Biotechnology 20:193–196.Google Scholar
33 UCSUSA. 2005. Available at Web site http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_environment/antibiotics_and_food/terms-frequently-used-in-discussions-of-antibiotic-resistance.html (revised 10 August 2005; accessed 21 September 2005).Google Scholar
34 Merriam-Webster Online. 2005. Available at Web site http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/enterprise (accessed 9 November 2005).Google Scholar
35 Farm Credit Canada. 2005. Available at Web site http://www.fcc-fac.ca/en/aboutus/profile/glossary_e.asp (modified 5 July 2005; accessed 9 November 2005).Google Scholar
36 Powell, J.M., Pearson, R.A., and Hiernaux, P.H. 2004. Crop-livestock interactions in the West African drylands. Agronomy Journal 96:469–483.Google Scholar
37 Hardaker, J.S. 2000. Some Issues Dealing with Risk in Agriculture. No. 2000–3. Working Paper Series in Agricultural and Resource Economics. School of Economics, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.Google Scholar
38 Archer, D.W., Pikul, J.L. Jr, and Riedell, W.E. 2003. Analyzing risk and risk management in cropping systems. In Hanson, J.D. and Krupinsky, J.M. (eds). Proceedings of the Dynamic Cropping Systems: Principles, Processes, and Challenges. Bismarck, ND. p. 155–164.Google Scholar
39 Morris, C. and Winter, M. 1999. Integrated farming systems: the third way for European agriculture? Land Use Policy 16:193–205.Google Scholar
40 The World Publishing Company. 1958. Webster's New World Dictionary, College Edition. The World Publishing Company, Cleveland, OH and New York, NY.Google Scholar
41 Armstrong, J.S. 2001. Introduction. In Armstrong, J.S. (ed.). Principles of Forecasting: A Handbook for Researchers and Practitioners. Kluwer Academic Publishing, Norwell, MA. p. 3.Google Scholar
42 Morwitz, V.G. 2001. Methods for forecasting from intentions data. In Armstrong, J.S. (ed.). Principles of Forecasting: A Handbook for Researchers and Practitioners. Kluwer Academic Publishing, Norwell, MA. p. 33–56.Google Scholar