Conference PaperPDF Available

ADOPTION AND ECONOMICS OF SILVOPASTURE SYSTEMS BY FARM SIZE IN NORTHEASTERN ARGENTINA

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Differences between the theoretical benefits and the actual adoption of silvopasture systems among farmers have prompted researchers and extension agents to learn more about the adoption mechanisms for silvopasture systems. In the past decade, farmers in northeast Argentina's Misiones and northern Corrientes provinces have begun adopting silvopasture systems to a moderate extent. Interestingly, adoption has occurred among small-, medium- and large-scale farmers, either through individual decisions, or spurred by extension education and financial subsidy payments. This unique situation allows us to explore potential differences and similarities between the adoption and implementation of silvopasture between farmers of different scales. A survey of managers of the three farm scales in Misiones and northern Corrientes was used to determine advantages and disadvantages of the system, as perceived by managers. In addition, farmers were asked to describe economic costs incurred and benefits received from the silvopasture parcels. These data were used to compare the perceived merits, likelihood of continuance and production levels for silvopasture systems among the different farm-scale levels.
Content may be subject to copyright.
In Olivier, A. and S. Campeau, eds. 2007. When Trees and Crops Get Together. Proceedings of the
10th North American Agroforestry Conference, Québec City, Canada, June 10-13, 2007. 219
ADOPTION AND ECONOMICS OF SILVOPASTURE SYSTEMS
BY FARM SIZE IN NORTHEASTERN ARGENTINA
Gregory Frey1, Hugo Fassola2, Nahuel Pachas2, Luis Colcombet2,
Santiago Lacorte3, Frederick Cubbage1 and Oscar Pérez4
1North Carolina State University, Dept. of Forestry and Env. Res., Raleigh, NC 27695, U.S.A
2Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria, EEA Montecarlo, Misiones, Argentina
3Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria, CR Misiones, Posadas, Misiones, Argentina
4Universidad Nacional de Misiones, Fac. de Ciencias Forestales, Eldorado, Misiones, Argentina
Contact: gefrey@ncsu.edu
Abstract: Differences between the theoretical benefits and the actual adoption of silvopasture
systems among farmers have prompted researchers and extension agents to learn more about the
adoption mechanisms for silvopasture systems. In the past decade, farmers in northeast
Argentina’s Misiones and northern Corrientes provinces have begun adopting silvopasture
systems to a moderate extent. Interestingly, adoption has occurred among small-, medium- and
large-scale farmers, either through individual decisions, or spurred by extension education and
financial subsidy payments. This unique situation allows us to explore potential differences and
similarities between the adoption and implementation of silvopasture between farmers of
different scales. A survey of managers of the three farm scales in Misiones and northern
Corrientes was used to determine advantages and disadvantages of the system, as perceived by
managers. In addition, farmers were asked to describe economic costs incurred and benefits
received from the silvopasture parcels. These data were used to compare the perceived merits,
likelihood of continuance and production levels for silvopasture systems among the different
farm-scale levels.
Key Words: Adopter perceptions, productivity, farm scale, silvopasture.
INTRODUCTION
Silvopasture systems have been shown to have potential profitability in many parts of the world
(Dangerfield and Harwell 1990; Clason 1999; Clason and Sharrow 2000; Grado et al. 2001;
Colcombet et al. 2004; Esquivel et al. 2004; Fassola et al. 2004a), yet are not commonly adopted
(Garrett et al. 2000; Rapey et al. 2001; Dagang and Nair 2003; Stainback and Alavalapati 2004).
Where silvopasture is practiced in the Americas, it is most often practiced by large landholders.
Even in countries where small landholders own livestock, it is relativly rare to see pastures
integrated with forestry systems. There are several possible barriers to adoption of silvopasture
systems for small-scale farmers with limited resources (Dagang and Nair 2003; Pagiola et al.
2004). If we are to expect good adoption of silvopasture systems among small farmers, we should
properly understand their motivations and expectations (Dagang and Nair 2003; Shrestha et al.
2004).
10e CONGRÈS NORD-AMÉRICAIN DAGROFORESTERIE, QUÉBEC, 2007
220
One possible explanation for the differential in adoption between small and large landholders is
that silvopasture systems exhibit increasing returns to scale. Under this hypothesis, increasing all
of the inputs would increase output more than proportionally. Small farmers would not be able to
access these efficiencies. We are unaware of any research that has estimated the production
efficiencies of silvopasture of varying scales. All financial analyses to date have assumed
constant costs and benefits per hectare (i.e. a linear relationship between land area and yield;
constant returns to scale). This may be a naïve approach to modeling silvopasture.
This study uses direct survey methods to qualitatively investigate the motivations behind
silvopasture adoption among farmers of different scales in northeastern Argentina, and whether
adopters are likely to continue use of the system. Then, we use farmers’ estimates of past and
future costs and benefits to approximate economic returns for different farm scales. Our study is
not designed to answer definitively all these questions, but rather to be a starting point for future
research in the area.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Description of the study area
The northeastern provinces of Misiones and northern Corrientes, Argentina, have experienced
moderate adoption of silvopasture systems in recent years among farms of all scales. Esquivel et
al. (2004) estimated that, assuming constant returns to scale at a 7% discount rate, silvopasture
yielded an equivalent annual income of 441 Argentine pesos (US$ 1 = Ar$ 3.085 in June 2006)
per hectare, higher than alternative agriculture, cattle-ranching or forestry systems. Silvopasture
implementation had reached an extent of approximately 10,000 hectares by 2004 (Esquivel et al.
2004). In general, these systems integrate a tree component of Pinus spp., Eucalyptus spp. or the
native Araucaria angustifolia with native (e.g. Axonopus compressus) or exotic (e.g. Brachiaria
brizantha) forage species and cattle.
A diversity of farm types exit in Misiones and Corrientes. Northern Corrientes and southwestern
Misiones are flat prairie-land, which has been traditionally used for cattle grazing. Central and
northern Misiones consists of a forest zone, which has been settled for agriculture, with some of
the more remote areas still relatively undisturbed (Fassola et al. 2004b). This area is utilized by
semi-subsistence and cash-crop farmers, including forest-product firms (who primarily plant
Pinus spp.).
Adoption of silvopasture was spurred on when the national government of Argentina began
offering cost-share payments to offset a portion of the costs of site preparation and planting trees
starting in 1999 (Congreso 1998). This program functioned fairly well until the Argentine
economic crisis of 2001. A number of large-scale cattle ranchers as well as medium- to large-
scale forest plantation firms have adopted silvopasture systems. We should note that forest-
product firms would have received the cost-share payments anyway; the decision to adopt
silvopasture was made independent of this policy. Also, special extension programs, including in-
kind provision of necessary capital for starting silvopasture parcels, have convinced a relatively
few small-scale farmers to adopt the system.
THE 10TH NORTH AMERICAN AGROFORESTRY CONFERENCE, QUÉBEC CITY, 2007
221
Farm survey
A farm survey of silvopasture adopters was conducted in the Misiones and northern Corrientes
provinces of northeastern Argentina during June and July of 2006. A purposive sample of
adopters of varying farm scales was selected throughout the region to participate in the survey.
These were identified by researchers and extension agents at the Instituto Nacional de Tecnología
Agropecuaria (INTA), who were familiar with the region. Personal interviews about opinions of
silvopasture systems, farm inputs and budgets, and producer success were conducted.
In total, 38 silvopasture practitioners of varying scales were interviewed, producing 35 usable
responses. Farm size (including all properties of the same owner in relatively close proximity)
ranged from 20 to 14,000 hectares with a mean of 1536 ha and a median of 280 ha. Surveyed
farmers were classified into three groups using natural clusters: small-scale (20-50 hectares),
medium-scale (90-800 ha) and large-scale (>1100 ha). There were 13 small-, 10 medium- and 12
large-scale farmers in the sample.
Farmers were asked qualitatively about the advantages and disadvantages that they perceived in
the silvopasture system at two points in time, at the time of the adoption decision and in the
present (i.e. during implementation of the system). They were asked whether they would be likely
to continue practicing silvopasture systems given the current prices and incentive policies. Each
of these questions was open-ended, that is, no list of possible responses was given. Farmers were
permitted to give as many responses as they felt appropriate.
Farmers were also asked in detail about the inputs and outputs received from silvopasture. They
were asked to state, whenever possible, actual costs and benefits incurred up to 2006 for a
specific silvopasture plot, based on recall. For future inputs and outputs, farmers were asked to
give realistic estimates based on their knowledge.
Inputs included capital and labor for site preparation and planting, thinning and pruning, annual
weeding and control of insects, daily livestock management, etc. Outputs included sale or
household consumption of timber, sale or household consumption of livestock and milk, etc.
Most farmers could recall fairly detailed information over a long period about relatively
infrequent events (pruning, sale of timber, etc.) but could not report with certainty about long-
term information regarding frequent events (livestock management). Therefore, farmers were
asked to estimate costs and benefits from livestock management in silvopasture systems only
over a one-year period (June 2005-May 2006).
Farmers were asked to estimate the 2006 height and diameter at breast height (DBH) of the trees
in the silvopasture system. When possible, sample measurements of height and DBH of trees in
the silvopasture plot were taken using a random plot design.
Data analysis
Responses for perceived (qualitative) advantages and disadvantages, and for the perceived
likelihood of continuance of silvopasture were pooled into similar responses. Responses were
compiled into the three farm-scale groups.
10e CONGRÈS NORD-AMÉRICAIN DAGROFORESTERIE, QUÉBEC, 2007
222
Data on the economic (quantitative) costs and benefits were compiled into spreadsheets to
calculate the equivalent annual income (EAI) for silvopasture on each farm (Jacobson 1998),
using a 7% discount rate. Because of the multiple-input, multiple-output nature of silvopasture,
and varying rotation lengths, EAI in monetary terms was used as a measure to compare
productivity. While prices were necessary in order to put inputs and outputs into common units,
the actual peso amounts may not have meaning in real terms. Prices from region to region may
vary somewhat, so a set of common prices in were used for inputs (e.g. labor, chemical
treatments) and outputs (e.g. pulp, timber, beef, milk) in order to measure actual production
rather than spatial and temporal anomalies in the market. Incentive payments were not taken into
account and in-kind support of supplies was treated as if the farmer had purchased the materials.
Based on past and present management and the current measurements, we used the
SIMULADOR FORESTAL (Crechi et al. 1997) program to estimate future timber harvests.
Inputs and outputs for livestock, based on the 2005-2006 data, were estimated from year 3 to
rotation completion.
Because the land used for adoption of a silvopasture system in each case belonged to one of many
possible starting scenarios, the costs of site preparation are inherently different in each case.
Cases existed in which the silvopasture system was planted on clear-cut plantation forest, annual
cropland, pasture and degraded native forest. In order to compare costs and benefits of the current
management without being biased by the starting condition of the land, each EAI was adjusted
(AEAI) to reflect a starting situation of clear-cut plantation forestland, using the difference in
average costs for site preparation (Colcombet 2005) between the actual starting condition and
clear-cut forest. This is consistent with the land being replanted to silvopasture after the current
timber rotation is completed.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Perceived advantages and disadvantages
In many cases, the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the system varied from the point in
time before adopting the system to the present. Among the 35 farmers interviewed, the most
common responses for advantages and disadvantages are listed in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.
In general, there were fewer negative responses about silvopasture systems than positive
responses. It is important to note that, since the sample was only of adopters, there is a form of
self-selection bias in the sample. Adopters most likely believed from the beginning that the
system would offer something positive. However, the study does provide one of the first
comparisons of perceptions of various advantages or disadvantages across farm-scale groups or
across time frames.
Currently perceived advantages
When farmers were asked what advantages they see in silvopasture at the present, the most
common response was that silvopasture systems provide microclimate benefits for livestock
management (Fig. 1). Large- and medium-scale managers were more likely to give this response
THE 10TH NORTH AMERICAN AGROFORESTRY CONFERENCE, QUÉBEC CITY, 2007
223
than small-scale farmers. The second most common response in general, and the most common
response among small-scale farmers, was that silvopasture systems have good cash-flow
qualities. In particular, sale of cattle and frequent forest thinnings can provide short- to medium-
term income, while the growth of sawtimber acts as a long-term investment. The fact that cash
flow benefits were the most common response among small-scale farmers corresponds well to the
fact that in developing regions it is difficult for small-scale farmers to access credit (or savings
accounts). In addition, because of the past instability of the Argentinean currency, real assets
including land, livestock, and trees may have exceptional value still in the country.
Table 1: Most common perceived advantages of silvopasture systems. Responses with less than a
15% frequency among all groups were omitted for brevity.
Advantage Explanation
Cash flow The silvopasture system products (livestock, thinned timber and final sawtimber) operate on
different time scales.
Practical Silvopasture provides a low-cost way to combine two activities that farmers were practicing
anyway.
Profitable Silvopasture systems provide more profit than alternative production systems in the region.
Microclimate In the summer, shade reduces heat stress on the livestock. Also, reduced heat stress on the forage
helps keep it tender and palatable in the summer. In the winter, trees provide some shelter against
frost.
Weed control Livestock help combat shade-tolerant weeds which would otherwise need to be sprayed in forest
plantations. Trees shade out some aggressive shade-intolerant weeds.
Fire control Livestock reduce the amount of dry matter under the forest, and thus reduce the risk of
catastrophic forest fires.
Erosion
control
Compared to other production systems, silvopasture provides a high degree of soil cover.
Dual use The system produces two products, timber and livestock, from the same parcel of land.
Timber quality The silviculture implied by a silvopasture system (high intensity of pruning and thinning) leads to
a high-quality end product (high grade sawtimber or veneer with few knots).
Table 2: Most common perceived disadvantages of silvopasture systems. Responses with less
than a 15% frequency among all groups were omitted for brevity.
Disadvantage Explanation
Uncertainty There are two forms of uncertainty: 1) being a new technology, relatively few studies have been
conducted, leaving farmers to trial and error, and 2) institutional instability in Argentina creates
uncertainty in prices, export policy and the continuance of the cost-share program.
Capital The investment required for the purchase of seedlings, herbicides, pesticides, etc. can be high.
Competition Competition between the tree and forage components for light, water and nutrients can decrease
the growth of both.
Complexity The system requires a very intensive management regime and can be quite difficult for those
uninitiated in the management of one of the components.
Health Wooded areas provide habitat for an increased quantity of livestock pests, such as ticks.
High percentages of respondents also answered that silvopasture provided the benefits of two
products from the same plot of land and weed control. Small farmers tended to respond that the
“dual-use” of land was a benefit while medium and large farmers were more pleased with the
benefit of weed control.
10e CONGRÈS NORD-AMÉRICAIN DAGROFORESTERIE, QUÉBEC, 2007
224
Fig. 1: Currently-perceived advantages of silvopasture. Frequency of response for various
perceived advantages, by farm-scale groups. Responses with less than a 15% frequency among
all groups were omitted for brevity.
Fire control was an important response for large- and medium-scale farmers. This may partially
reflect the fact that the more fire-prone, savanna areas of the region are generally divided into
much larger landholdings, while areas of native forest are less likely to have major difficulties
with fire and have been colonized more recently by small-scale farm families.
There were substantial differences between the benefits farmers believed they would receive
when they adopted the systems and the benefits they actually felt were the most important now
that they have significant experience with the system. In particular, improved “microclimate”
increased in perceived importance, surpassing “dual-use” of land, which decreased in frequency
of response. In addition, “cash flow” became an increasingly important benefit, especially for
small-scale farmers.
In general, it appears that small-scale farmers focused mostly on more direct financial benefits of
the system, while large- and medium-scale farmers perceived the technical benefits of the system
as more advantageous (although technical benefits such as microclimate and fire control do have
a financial side).
Currently perceived disadvantages
The most common concerns among farmers at the present are competition between trees and
forage plants for light, water, etc., and the complexity of system management (Fig. 2). Farmers
have fewer concerns about silvopasture in the present, now that they have experience with the
system, than before adoption. There is a decreased importance of concerns about plant
competition relative to system complexity, indicating that farmers now realize that there are
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Microclimate
Cash flow
Dual use
Weed control
Fire control
Profitable
Erosion control
Practical
Timber quality
Response
%
All farmers
Large scale
Medium scale
Small scale
THE 10TH NORTH AMERICAN AGROFORESTRY CONFERENCE, QUÉBEC CITY, 2007
225
many ways of managing the competition among plants, although this management requires much
planning.
Fig. 2: Currently-perceived disadvantages of silvopasture. Frequency of response for various
perceived disadvantages, by farm-scale groups. Responses with less than a 15% frequency
among all groups were omitted for brevity.
The only disadvantage of silvopasture that was perceived to be more important currently than it
was at the time of adoption is the requirement of investment capital to start the system. Normally,
we would think that this would be a more important disadvantage when farmers are considering
adoption, since this is when most of the investment would take place. However, most of these
farmers initially adopted silvopasture before 2001, when cost-share and in-kind support programs
were more easily accessible. It is likely that they did not view the capital requirement as a barrier
at the time of adoption because of the availability of these programs, which may no longer be a
feasible alternative. It is interesting that no small-scale farmers voiced this concern.
Likelihood of continuance
The majority of farmers indicated that they had received help starting the silvopasture system
either through government cost-share programs or in-kind support. By a wide margin, farmers
indicated that they would probably increase the area of land given to silvopasture if cost-share or
in-kind support programs continued (Fig. 3). Small farmers seemed somewhat less likely to state
that they would increase the area of their land dedicated to silvopasture, but this is at least in part
due to the fact that small farmers are more land-constrained, and most high-productivity areas are
used for annual subsistence or cash crops.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Competition
Complexity
Uncertainty
Capital
Health
Response
%
All farmers
Large scale
Medium scale
Small scale
10e CONGRÈS NORD-AMÉRICAIN DAGROFORESTERIE, QUÉBEC, 2007
226
Fig. 3: Likelihood of continuance of silvopasture system area, with current prices and incentive
policies.
In addition, the majority of farmers, particularly large- and medium-scale farmers, indicated that
they would continue implementing silvopasture systems, even if no government support were
provided (Fig. 4). This is a good indication that these farmers believe that silvopasture is
beneficial to them. Furthermore, these data seem to indicate, to some degree, that the hurdle of
convincing farmers to install silvopasture is a one-time barrier.
Fig. 4: Likelihood of continuance of silvopasture system area, with no incentive policies
Economic results
Adjusted equivalent annual income (AEAI) was highly sensitive to changes in the wage rate. This
is significant because small-scale farmers substitute labor for capital. Small farms had a much
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Increase Maintain Decrease
All farmers
Large scale
Medium scale
Small scale
0
20
40
60
80
100
Increase or Maintain Decrease
All farmers
Large scale
Medium scale
Small scale
THE 10TH NORTH AMERICAN AGROFORESTRY CONFERENCE, QUÉBEC CITY, 2007
227
higher AEAI when the wage rate of Ar$ 15 per day was used (often cited by small farmers as the
cost of hiring a hand for a day), while large farms were more productive at a wage of Ar$ 58.41
per day (the official minimum wage for unskilled labor, including taxes and other costs for which
a firm may be responsible, such as food and transportation; Fig. 5). At Ar$ 38.90 (the official
minimum wage for unskilled labor, including taxes), the three farm scale groups had very similar
AEAIs, with small farms slightly higher. At Ar$ 38.90, the rate most commonly used in cost-
benefit financial analyses, the overall mean was Ar$ 406, which is close to the value estimated by
Esquivel et al. (2004) (Ar$ 441). When considering only farms from north-central Misiones, the
region considered by Esquivel et al. (2004), our mean total AEAI was Ar$ 442.
Fig. 5: Adjusted Equivalent Annual Income (AEAI) per hectare for farms of varying scales at
varying wage rates.
The fact that small-scale farmers have equal or higher AEAI at low and intermediate wage rates
means that we cannot reject the assumption of constant/decreasing returns to scale. Increasing
returns to scale do not conform to the data, and would not appear to be an important factor in
preventing small-scale farmers from adopting silvopasture systems.
CONCLUSIONS
Small, medium and large farmers in Northeastern Argentina demonstrated different perceptions
of silvopasture systems. Small farmers are interested in the financial advantages of having short-,
medium- and long-term cash flow, while larger-scale farmers seem to appreciate technical
benefits such as improved microclimate, weed control and fire control. Extensionists and
researchers should keep in mind the benefits farmers believe to be the most important when
conversing with potential future adopters and when comparing production systems.
The question of whether or not the front-end investment in silvopasture is too much for farmers
to overcome is still an interesting one and merits more precise research. The majority of all
adopters surveyed indicated that they would continue implementation or even expand
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Ar$ 58.41 Ar$ 38.90 Ar$ 15.00
Cost of Labor per Day
AEAI (Ar$)
All Farmers
Large Scale
Medium Scale
Small Scale
10e CONGRÈS NORD-AMÉRICAIN DAGROFORESTERIE, QUÉBEC, 2007
228
silvopasture on their lands, with or without cost-share or in-kind benefits. In addition, only a
relatively few farmers believed that the high investment cost was a disadvantage of the system.
However, it is questionable whether or not new farmers, particularly small farmers with limits on
capital, are likely to adopt the system without some form of incentives. Small-scale farmers did
not cite capital costs as major concern. These results indicate that adoption will probably
continue.
The economic analysis of productivity for the different farm scales provided insight into the
substitution of capital for labor under differing wages. The data do not support increasing returns
to scale. However, a method that does not depend on input/output prices, such as data
envelopment analysis, may help to illuminate further these results.
Overall, the results of this study do indicate that silvopasture systems have significant benefits to
farmers who adopt them, of all scales. Further research in other countries in the Americas may
help determine their applicability in other locations where good livestock and forest products
markets exist. The results also can inform future research on economic analyses of silvopasture
systems and differences by ownership size.
REFERENCES
Clason, T.R., 1999. Silvopastoral practices sustain timber and forage production in commercial
loblolly pine plantations of northwest Louisiana, USA. Agroforestry Systems 44: 293-303.
Clason, T.R. and Sharrow, S.H. 2000. Silvopastoral practices [in the USA]. In North American
Agroforestry: An Integrated Science and Practice. Edited by H.E. Garrett, W.J. Rietveld, R.F.
Fisher. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, 119.
Colcombet, L. 2005. Coeficientes Técnicos de Plantaciones Forestales en la Provincia de
Misiones. INTA: EEA Montecarlo. Montecarlo, Misiones, Argentina. 46 pp.
Colcombet, L., Crechi, E., Fassola, H., Lacorte, S. and San Jose, M., 2004. Resultados del
análisis financiero y socioeconómico del manejo forestal y silvopastoril de Grevillea robusta
en Misiones. Revista Forestal YVYRARETA 12: 9-18.
Congreso de la Nación Argentina. 1998. Argentine Federal Law 25080: Ley de Inversiones para
Bosques Cultivados. Boletín Oficial Nro. 29066 (19/01/1999) 1ra Sección pags. 2-4.
Crechi, E., Fassola, H. and Freidl, A. 1997. SIMULADOR FORESTAL: Sistema de simulación y
crecimiento para especies forestales implantadas. INTA: EEA Montecarlo. Montecarlo,
Misiones, Argentina.
Dagang, A.B.K. and Nair, P.K.R. 2003. Silvopastoral research and adoption in Central America:
Recent findings and recommendations for future directions. Agroforestry Systems 59: 149-
155.
THE 10TH NORTH AMERICAN AGROFORESTRY CONFERENCE, QUÉBEC CITY, 2007
229
Dangerfield, C.W., Jr. and Harwell, R.L. 1990. An analysis of a silvopastoral system for the
marginal land in the southeast United States. Agroforestry Systems 10: 187-197.
Esquivel, J., Fassola, H.E., Lacorte, S.M., Colcombet, L., Crechi, E., Pachas, N. and Keller, A.
2004. Sistemas Silvopastoriles - Una sólida alternativa de sustenabilidad social, económica y
ambiental. In 11as Jornadas Técnicas Forestales y Ambientales - FCF, UNaM – INTA: EEA
Montecarlo. Eldorado, Misiones, Argentina.
Fassola, H.E., Lacorte, S.M., Esquivel, J., Colcombet, L., Moscovich, F., Crechi, E., Pachas, N.
and Keller, A. 2004a. Sistemas silvopastoriles en Misiones y NE de Corrientes y su entorno
de negocios. Available from INTA: EEA Montecarlo. Directorio de información: Sistemas
Silvopastoriles.
Fassola, H.E., Lacorte, S.M., Pachas, N. and Keller, A. 2004b. Experiencias sobre manejo
silvopastoril en Misiones y NE de Corrientes, Argentina. In 11as Jornadas Técnicas
Forestales y Ambientales - FCF, UNaM – INTA: EEA Montecarlo. Eldorado, Misiones,
Argentina.
Garrett, H.E., Rietveld, W.J. and Fisher, R.F. 2000. North American Agroforestry: An Integrated
Science and Practice. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, U.S.A.
Grado, S.C., Hovermale, C.H. and St Louis, D.G. 2001. A financial analysis of a silvopasture
system in southern Mississippi. Agroforestry Systems 53: 313-322.
Jacobson, M. 1998. Comparing values of timber production to agricultural crop production. Draft
paper. Florida Coop. Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences,
University of Florida. Gainesville, FL. 6 pp.
Pagiola, S., Agostini, P., Gobbi, J., de Haan, C., Ibrahim, M., Murgueitio, E., Ramírez, E.,
Rosales, M. and Ruíz, J.P. 2004. Paying for Biodiversity Conservation Services in
Agricultural Landscapes. The International Bank for Reconstruction/World Bank, Report 96,
Washington.
Rapey, H., Lifran, R. and Valadier, A. 2001. Identifying social, economic and technical
determinants of silvopastoral practices in temperate uplands: Results of a survey in the Massif
Central region of France. Agricultural Systems 69: 119-135.
Shrestha, R.K., Alavalapati, J.R.R. and Kalmbacher, R.S. 2004. Exploring the potential for
silvopasture adoption in south-central Florida: An application of SWOT-AHP method.
Agricultural Systems 81: 185-199.
Stainback, G.A. and Alavalapati, J.R.R. 2004. Restoring longleaf pine through silvopasture
practices: An economic analysis. Forest Policy and Economics 6: 371-378.
... Small-scale farmers in the region have expressed a preference for silvopasture over forestry based on a preference for receiving more revenue in the short-term (Frey et al. 2007). According to these results, there may also be reasons for supporting silvopasture over forestry on efficiency grounds. ...
... Also, prices may vary from region to region or from subset to subset of DMUs. In this case, a benefit-cost ratio might be calculated for each farm, but the ratios would not be comparable between farms(Frey et al. 2007).Of interest to this study is whether one farm technology is more productive in general or for some subsets of farmers under robust price/value conditions, including nonmarket values that are unobservable. The benefit of using a measure of technical efficiency, rather than allocative efficiency, is that we do not need to make assumptions about market values or non-market preferences such as time preference. ...
... Se compara también la eficiencia de dichos sistemas para diferentes clases de productores, los de pequeña, mediana y gran escala. Los productores de diferentes escalas tienen percepciones diferentes de las ventajas y desventajas de los sistemas silvopastoriles, pero no se sabe si una clase de productores logra mejor eficiencia (FREY et al. 2007). ...
... Con múltiples entradas y salidas, se complica mucho la medición de eficiencia. FREY et al. (2007) demostraron la dificultad de calcular este tipo de medida de eficiencia de beneficio/costo cuando los precios varían de región a región o entre grupos de fincas. FARRELL (1957) utilizó observaciones empíricas de unidades de decisión (DMUs, sigla en inglés) para construir una frontera empírica de producción óptima. ...
Article
Full-text available
SUMMARY Researchers and extension agents have encouraged the adoption of silvopasture on farms of all scales in northeast Argentina, under the assumption that it is more productive than other conventional land uses such as plantation forestry without livestock or open-air pasture. My goal is to assess whether silvopasture is truly a more productive use of land. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is a non-parametric method that can be used to identify parcels that are the most efficient. DEA is appropriate for analyzing silvopasture systems because it is easily able to incorporate multiple inputs and outputs. I show that open-air pastures are less efficient than silvopasture on farms that utilize both systems. An analysis of scale efficiency shows that medium scale farms have higher efficiency, on average than large scale farms for silvopasture systems. The DEA methodology identifies the efficient parcels that can be used as models to improve inefficient farms. Key words: Agroforestry, silvopasture, technical efficiency, efficient peers, data envelopment analysis RESUMEN Investigadores y extensionistas han fomentado la adopción de sistemas silvopastoriles en fincas de todas las escalas en el noreste de Argentina, bajo la suposición que son más productivos que otras utilizaciones convencionales de la tierra, como plantaciones forestales sin ganado o potreros a cielo abierto. El objetivo del presente trabajo es evaluar si sistemas silvopastoriles son más productivos en realidad. El Análisis por Envoltura de Datos (DEA) es un método no-paramétrico que se puede usar para identificar las parcelas que son las más eficientes. El DEA es apropiado para analizar sistemas silvopastoriles porque se puede incorporar fácilmente entradas y salidas múltiples. Se demuestra que potreros a cielo abierto son menos eficientes que sistemas silvopastoriles en las fincas que utilizan ambos sistemas. Un análisis de la eficiencia de escala demuestra que las fincas de mediana escala tienen mayor eficiencia, de promedio, que las de gran escala. El método del DEA identifica las parcelas eficientes que pueden servir como modelos para mejorar las parcelas ineficientes. Palabras clave: Sistemas agroforestales y silvopastoriles, eficiencia técnica, pares eficientes, análisis por envoltura de datos
... We observe that this model is purely formulaic: rather than implementing optimization techniques, it employs a series of formulas that allow estimating the different outputs of the system. Finally, [9], [25], [23] and [27] provide information about the adoption of silvopastoralism around the globe and a characterization of the systems that apply this agroforestry practice. In particular, we would like to highlight the work by [25], which focuses its research in Uruguay. ...
... A clear and consistent message toward what makes successful silvopastures coupled with best management practices needs to be developed for silvopasture in the Northeastern United States. Little knowledge of landowners about agroforestry practices is not unique to the Northeastern United States (Barbieri and Valdivia 2010), and farmer education has been shown to lead to successful agroforestry adoption (Frey et al. 2007). While farmers interviewed in this study favored trees, many of them were unaware of how to manage trees. ...
Article
Full-text available
The use of silvopasture systems on farms in the Northeastern United States has never been documented. Our objective was to gather baseline data to describe silvopasture practices and perspectives in the Northeastern United States. To accomplish this, we investigated the structure, management of, and reasons for use of silvopastures in New York state and New England through a series of interviews and inventories on 20 farms purposefully chosen as practicing silvopasture. Thematic content analysis was conducted to summarize interview results and identify trends related to silvopasture practices. Three farmers in this study had been practicing silvopasture on their farms over 30 years; the rest were new to silvopasture in the past 10 years. Only three of 20 farmers interviewed in this study had experience practicing silvopasture prior to implementing it on their farms. Forest conversion to silvopasture was the primary starting point for silvopastures observed on regional farms. Orchard, open field edge, outdoor living barn, and plantation silvopastures were also documented on multiple farms. Shade and a desire to maximize use of farm woodlands were primary reasons for silvopasture utilization. This research provides evidence that silvopastures are being used to diversify regional farms. For the practice to be advanced in the region further research is needed on the topic.
... The study concluded that small, medium, and large farmers in Northeastern Argentina had different views of silvopasture systems. Small-scale farms were more interested in financial gain being that they had less labor load, while large-scale farmers appreciated the environmental contributions such as improved microclimate, weed control, and fire control (Frey et al., 2007). ...
Article
Full-text available
The study assessed the impact of using different stocking rates of goats under pine plantation on plant species occurrence and animal productivity. It was conducted on an 11 year-old loblolly pine plantation site in Epes, Alabama from July to October 2011. Thirty-six Kiko crossbred male goat kids of 4 to 5 months of age were assigned to different stocking rates, namely, low (4 goats/acre), medium (8 goats/acre), and high (12 goats/acre) with three replications each. Forage composition, animal daily gain (ADG) and blood urea nitrogen (BUN) were monitored. Bahia grass (Paspalum notatum) was the most dominant grass species across all treatments. Quantities of understory plant species decreased across all stocking densities with season, but there were no statistical differences (p > 0.05); ADG and BUN were similar. Long-term studies need to be conducted before any meaningful inferences can be drawn. Keywords: Silvopasture, Loblolly Pine, Goats, Understory Species Composition
... Silvopastoral practices involve the combination of forage, livestock and forestry. If managed effectively, silvopastoral systems can provide numerous advantages, such as reducing the risk of forest fires, lowering costs for weed control and providing a secondary revenue source (Frey et al. 2007). Silvopastoral systems have been shown to be an efficient way to manage forests for high-quality timber in Argentina (Esquivel et al. 2004; Fassola et al. 2004). ...
Technical Report
Full-text available
Technical Report
Full-text available
RESUMEN EJECUTIVO Durante las últimas décadas se ha visto un enorme crecimiento de las inversiones en el sector forestal en Sudamérica. Especialmente en los países del Cono Sur, como Chile, Argentina Uruguay y el sur de Brasil, se han hecho fuertes inversiones en plantaciones forestales, principalmente de eucaliptos (Eucalyptus spp.) y pinos (Pinus spp.). Además, Bolivia se ha convertido en un modelo internacional del manejo sostenible de bosques nativos para la producción de madera. Paraguay sin embargo, se encuentra rezagado en comparación con sus países vecinos en cuanto a la inversión forestal. Solamente tiene 43.000 hectáreas de bosques plantados (FAO 2005) y probablemente una superficie semejante con bosques nativos bajo manejo sostenible. La agricultura, la ganadería y la explotación destructiva de los bosques nativos remanentes siguen dominando la economía de Paraguay. Cambiar la cultura paraguaya actual a una de apreciación de la sustentabilidad y de inversiones a largo plazo, llevará tiempo. Los inversionistas extranjeros siguen desanimados por la burocracia y la corrupción, la aplicación parcial e inconsistente de las leyes y la carencia general de infraestructura. La economía paraguaya depende mucho de las exportaciones forestales, provenientes de un aprovechamiento destructivo de los bosques nativos. Está claro que en algún momento el país tendrá que empezar a invertir en la producción futura para estabilizar su precaria situación ambiental. Profesionales del sector forestal tienen esperanza en que los recientes cambios políticos y los que se den a futuro, como la creación del Instituto Forestal Nacional a partir de una reestructura del Servicio Forestal Nacional, puedan impulsar la reforestación. El presente estudio estima la rentabilidad financiera de potenciales inversiones forestales en Paraguay. Se utilizan estimaciones de costos y rendimientos obtenidos mediante entrevistas con administradores forestales, consultores, investigadores y funcionarios de Gobierno y de organizaciones sin fines de lucro. El análisis empezó con un caso base, bajo las suposiciones de costo cero de la tierra, un 100% de tierra utilizable, una distancia de 45 Km desde el bosque hasta el mercado, así como costos estándares de preparación del sitio, subsidio cero y precios actuales. Después, se realizaron análisis de sensibilidad bajo otros supuestos. En la región Oriental del Paraguay, se encontró que las especies Eucalyptus grandis y Melia azedarach fueron las que tuvieron los mayores retornos, con Valores Esperados de la Tierra (VET, calculados con una tasa de descuento de 8%) entre US4.200yUS 4.200 y US 4.700 por hectárea y Tasas Internas de Retorno (TIR) mayores de 21% en la cuenca del río Paraná bajo las suposiciones base. Estos son excelentes niveles de rentabilidad. Sin embargo, la especie M. azedarach es propensa a enfermedades, lo cual reduce considerablemente los retornos. En la cuenca del río Paraguay, las mismas especies tuvieron VET entre US2.800yUS 2.800 y US 3.200 por hectárea y TIR de aproximadamente 19%. Otras especies con buenas tasas de retorno (VET > 0,TIR>8ivEnlaregioˊnOccidentaloChaco,esprobablequemenosespeciesseanapropiadasporelclimaaˊridoylossuelospobres.Sinembargo,M.azedarachyE.camaldulensistuvieronbuenosretornos(VETde0, TIR > 8%) son las plantaciones de las exóticas E. camaldulensis y Pinus taeda, el cultivo de yerba mate (Ilex paraguariensis) y el manejo sostenible del bosque nativo. iv En la región Occidental o Chaco, es probable que menos especies sean apropiadas por el clima árido y los suelos pobres. Sin embargo, M. azedarach y E. camaldulensis tuvieron buenos retornos (VET de 800-1000,TIRaproximadamentedel121000, TIR aproximadamente del 12%) en el bajo Chaco, y niveles razonables en el Chaco central árido (VET cerca de 0, TIR cerca de 8%). M. azedarach es propensa a una enfermedad en el bajo Chaco, reduciendo así considerablemente los retornos, pero no es afectada por la principal enfermedad en el Chaco central (probablemente por las condiciones secas que no favorecen a la enfermedad). También en el Chaco central, este estudio demuestra que el manejo de las especies nativas Prosopis spp. con regeneración natural en áreas con pasturas pueden tener retornos moderados. Se muestran análisis de sensibilidad respecto a cambios en varios de los supuestos anteriormente mencionadas. En todos los casos, los retornos se movieron en la dirección esperada cuando se cambiaron los parámetros subyacentes. Es decir, por un lado los retornos bajaron por incluir los costos de la tierra, por reducir la superficie utilizable para plantaciones, por aumentar la distancia desde el bosque al mercado y por aumentar los costos de preparación del sitio, mientras que por otro lado los retornos subieron por las políticas para promover inversiones forestales como subsidios o préstamos con bajas tasas de interés y por aumento de los precios reales de la madera. En la mayoría de los casos, el orden relativo de los retornos fue básicamente el mismo, sin grandes cambios. El estudio considera también retornos que incluyen el costo de la tierra y una superficie utilizable menor del 100% de la superficie total (debido a impedimentos físicos, protección ambiental, edificaciones y caminos, etc.). Incluir el costo de la tierra es importante no solamente porque algunos inversionistas tal vez no sean propietarios, sino también porque el precio de mercado representa el costo de oportunidad de la tierra, su valor con el mejor uso alternativo. Restar los costos de la tierra de los retornos proporciona una manera de comparar el manejo forestal con usos alternativos (como el cultivo de soja en la región Oriental). Aun después de considerar los costos de la tierra y una superficie utilizable reducida, algunas especies como E. grandis en toda la región Oriental y E. camaldulensis en la cuenca del río Paraguay y bajo Chaco, tuvieron VET positivos. Es probable que estas especies sean las mejores alternativas forestales a la agricultura, en ausencia de políticas para promover inversiones forestales. También se consideran dos opciones de políticas para promover inversiones forestales y el efecto de un aumento en los precios reales de la madera. La primera opción de política es un subsidio que desde 1995 tiene fuerza de ley en Paraguay, aunque hasta hoy en día no se ha cumplido. Esta política proporcionaría un gran aumento en el valor de la mayoría de las inversiones forestales. La segunda opción es un sistema de préstamos de baja tasa de interés (5% anual) para inversiones forestales, una propuesta de la Federación Paraguaya de Madereros (FEPAMA). Se observa que los préstamos proveen altos retornos para las mejores especies (parecido al subsidio), pero no hacen que las especies menos apropiadas sean rentables en la misma manera que los subsidios. Además, los préstamos tendrían un costo menor para el estado u organización de aplicación; entonces, es más probable que se cumplan. Un aumento en los precios de la madera obviamente aumentaría el retorno de la inversión. Menos obvio es el hecho de que con mayores precios, el manejo de E. camaldulensis para leña v (energía de biomasa) rápidamente llegaría a ser uno de los regímenes de manejo con mejor tasa de retorno, a pesar de que tiene el peor retorno en el caso base. En general, este informe demuestra que los retornos en inversiones forestales en Paraguay pueden ser razonablemente buenos, cuando se compara con los usos alternativos de la tierra y con las inversiones forestales en países aledaños. Sin embargo, las instituciones e infraestructuras en el país, actualmente no son favorables para la implementación de inversiones forestales sostenibles. Esta situación aparentemente está mejorando y el manejo forestal aumentará, pero muy paulatinamente si las tendencias actuales continúan.
Article
Full-text available
Silvopasture systems combine trees, forage, and livestock in a variety of different species and management regimes, depending on the biophysical, economic, cultural, and market factors in a region. We describe and compare actual farm practices and current research trials of silvopastoral systems in eight regions within seven countries of the world: Misiones and Corrientes provinces, Argentina; La Pampa province, Argentina; northwestern Minas Gerais, Brazil; the Aysén region of Patagonia, Chile; the North Island of New Zealand; the Southeast United States; Paraguay; and Uruguay. Some countries use native trees and existing forests; some use plantations, particularly of exotic species. Natural forest silvopasture systems generally add livestock in extensive systems, to capture the benefits of shade, forage, and income diversification without much added inputs. Plantation forest systems are more purposive and intensive, with more focus on joint production and profits, for small owners, large ranches, and timber companies. Trends suggest that more active management of both natural and planted silvopastoral systems will be required to enhance joint production of timber and livestock, achieve income diversification and reduce financial risk, make more profit, improve environmental benefits, and realize more resilience to adapt to climate change.
Article
Full-text available
Adoption of improved silvopastoral practices in degraded pasture areas is thought to provide valuable local and global environmental benefits, including biodiversity conservation, However, these practices are insufficiently attractive to individual land users for them to adopt them spontaneously, particularly due to their high initial costs. This paper describes the contract mechanism developed for the Regional Integrated Silvopastoral Ecosystem Management Project, which is being implemented with financing from the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The project is testing the use of the payment-for-service mechanism to encourage the adoption of silvopastoral practices in three countries of Central and South America: Colombia, Costa Rica, and Nicaragua. The project has created a mechanism that pays land users for the global environmental services they are generating, so that the additional income stream makes the proposed practices privately profitable. Designing the mechanism required addressing issues such as (1) measuring the actual amount of environmental services being provided, so that appropriate payments can be made; (2) providing payments in a way that resulted in the desired change in land use; and (3) avoiding the creation of perverse incentives (for example, for land users to cut down existing trees so as to qualify for additional payments for tree planting). Two variants of the proposed payment mechanism are being tested, with participating land users assigned randomly to one or the other. The project also includes extensive monitoring of the effectiveness of each mechanism in stimulating adoption of the proposed measures and of the resulting impact on environmental services and on household welfare. These features, together with the three-country approach, will provide in the coming years a very rich dataset for testing the use of contract mechanisms for biodiversity conservation.
Article
Full-text available
A modified Hartman model was developed to investigate the economic potential of silvopasture as a means of restoring longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) on private land. Specifically, the model was used to investigate the impact of payments to the landowner for sequestering carbon and the effect of lengthening the rotation to produce red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) habitat. The results suggested that silvopasture is more profitable than either traditional ranching or traditional forestry. Further, it was found that, carbon payments increased the profitability, optimal rotation age and optimal tree density for both silvopasture and traditional forestry. In addition, extending the rotation to 60 years to produce red-cockaded woodpecker habitat is less costly with silvopasture than with traditional forestry. These results suggest that silvopasture may be an attractive land use option for landowners who desire to restore longleaf pine on their land.
Article
Silvopasture is reemerging as a land use in the southern US. Alternate land use treatments based on field trials for timber and pasture for beef cattle production were financially evaluated. Multiple-use management aspects of these systems were further illustrated by the addition of fee hunting. Land Expectation Values (LEVs) were lower when silvopasture treatments were compared to steer grazing only. However, silvopasture treatments compared favorably to some grazing treatments. LEVs were higher when silvopasture treatments were compared to commercial forest plantation applications on similar sites. Silvopasture systems promote multiple-use management of the land under an environmentally friendly cropping system whereby certain types of wildlife can thrive. This is particularly relevant in light of recent increases in fee hunting in the South. LEVs were reduced by 289,289, 200, and $151 ha−1 at discount rates of 5%, 7%, and 9% respectively, when fee hunting was excluded in the recommended silvopasture treatment. The monetary value of a wildlife component in this system can be interpreted as the expected value gained per hectare per rotation in perpetuity when fee hunting is part of the management plan. On average, it represented an 8.6% gain in LEVs for this treatment. Results from this study support the potential for silvopasture applications in the South for private landowners. Cattle grazing of improved forage in commercially productive loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) stands can relieve annual cash flow problems inherent in tree production.
Article
Four forage management treatments, bahiagrass, common bermudagrass, Coastal bermudagrass, and timber only were established in 26-year-old loblolly pine plantation. Pine growth data were collected in 1984, 1990, and 1995, and forage production was evaluated at 21-day intervals from April to October from 1991 through 1995. Forage management practices improved timber production, increasing five-year merchantable volume growth by 13 m3 ha-1. Mean five-year forage crop yields differed among treatments (P = 0.05) with daily dry matter yields averaging 39, 46, and 48 kg ha-1 for bahiagrass, common bermudagrass, and Coastal bermudagrass, respectively. Forage nutritional quality did not differ among forage crops. Forage management treatment future net values were computed for a 5% real interest rate. Although the future net value for bahiagrass and common bermudagrass exceeded Coastal bermudagrass, the mean forage crop future net value was similar to the timber only treatment.
Article
Human population growth in Central America during the last thirty years has lead to encroachment of forests for food production and resulted in the replacement of forests with pastureland. Deforestation and degradation of productive soils have prompted researchers to investigate agroforestry as an alternative approach to land management. Silvopastoral systems in particular have been studied and their capacity to augment nutrient cycling, enhance soil processes, supply forage for livestock, and provide habitat for flora and fauna have been documented. Despite conclusive research findings, Central American producers are reluctant to integrate well-researched silvopastoral systems into their farming systems. Thus, it is imperative that researchers investigate the reasons for scant adoption, and that adoption is given precedence. We suggest that adoption research be made a priority on local, national, and regional silvopastoral research agendas. To explore incidence of low adoption, research should identify specific barriers, assess the technology generation process, examine the risks that silvopastoral adoption presents, and evaluate the potential for the integration of silvopastoral technologies on-farm. In addition, we recommend that the future Central American silvopastoral research agenda include the development of a clear understanding of the process of adoption specific to potential silvopastoral adopters in the region.
Article
Almost 20 million acres of non-forest cropland in the South can be classified as marginal. Demand projections for forest products call for a 40 percent increase by year 2030. Recent regenerated tree acres lag behind harvested acres. Multiple land use practices combining trees and grazing adjust cash flows forward mitigating negative flow period associated with conventional forest production. Profit opportunities for private, non-industrial landowners can be increased by ranking inputs in order of changes to net present value(NPV). A sensitivity analysis of an agroforestry scenario, including trees, beef cattle, and pasture, allows producers to concentrate management efforts where returns are greatest. Model results show greatest returns to NPV was realized from improvement to Chip-N-Saw income. The least increase in NPV came when the cost of control burns was changed.
Article
We analyzed the prospects and challenges for silvopasture adoption in south-central Florida using the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats approach in combination with analytic hierarchy process. We used preference data from opinion leaders who have had extensive knowledge about silvopasture practices in south-central Florida. Results reveal that strengths and opportunities for silvopasture adoption outweigh its weaknesses and threats. The participants perceive that land stewardship and diversification of income as major strengths of silvopasture and environmental benefits and government support for silvopasture practices as important opportunities. While long-term investment requirement and poor-quality soils are identified as weaknesses for the adoption of silvopasture, government regulation relating to land-use practices is considered as a critical threat. These results provide important insights for policy developments relating to silvopasture practices.
Article
Silvopastoral farming practices as an answer to land and forest abandonment in disadvantaged areas have been suggested by forestry and agricultural development and research bodies in France, but such practices only occur on a limited area at present. To assess the feasibility of such silvopastoral techniques in a family farm context, a survey was conducted on silvopastoral systems in spontaneous Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) woods in the Lozère Departement in France. A sampling procedure and questionnaire was designed to characterise determinants of silvopastoral practices. In all 150 farms were visited. A typology of silvopastoral plot management was extracted from the survey. Inputs and outputs were characterised. Typologies of farms and households were also developed, characterised by land, labour, livestock, consumption and inheritance patterns. The management of woodland plots was similar across farms, but their importance to the whole family farm system differed. Woodlands were considered as a reserve of land, forage or liquidity for the long term, but their uses were limited by livestock farmers' short-term technical and economic constraints. To induce development of silvicultural practices, both their short- and long-term effects must be carefully considered in relation to farmers' differing objectives.
SIMULADOR FORESTAL: Sistema de simulación y crecimiento para especies forestales implantadas. INTA: EEA Montecarlo
  • E Crechi
  • H Fassola
  • A Freidl
Crechi, E., Fassola, H. and Freidl, A. 1997. SIMULADOR FORESTAL: Sistema de simulación y crecimiento para especies forestales implantadas. INTA: EEA Montecarlo. Montecarlo, Misiones, Argentina.