Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering

ISSN 2095-7505

ISSN 2095-977X(Online)

CN 10-1204/S

Postal Subscription Code 80-906

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front. Agr. Sci. Eng.    2021, Vol. 8 Issue (1) : 1-14    https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FASE-2021384
EDITORIAL
INTEGRATING CROP AND LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION SYSTEMS—TOWARDS AGRICULTURAL GREEN DEVELOPMENT
Yong HOU1, Oene OENEMA1,2(), Fusuo ZHANG1
1. National Academy of Agriculture Green Development, College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China.
2. Wageningen Environmental Research, Wageningen University and Research, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, the Netherlands.
 Download: PDF(1848 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Corresponding Author(s): Oene OENEMA   
Just Accepted Date: 03 February 2021   Online First Date: 12 March 2021    Issue Date: 29 March 2021
 Cite this article:   
Yong HOU,Oene OENEMA,Fusuo ZHANG. INTEGRATING CROP AND LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION SYSTEMS—TOWARDS AGRICULTURAL GREEN DEVELOPMENT[J]. Front. Agr. Sci. Eng. , 2021, 8(1): 1-14.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fase/EN/10.15302/J-FASE-2021384
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fase/EN/Y2021/V8/I1/1
Fig.1  Photos of mixed crop-livestock systems, household systems and specialized livestock in China.
Box 1Domestication of plants and animals
Only about 100 out of 200,000 wild species of higher plants have yielded valuable domesticates, and only 14 out of 148 large terrestrial animals, weighing 45 kg or more, have been domesticated[6,7]. In practice, just three plant species (wheat, rice and maize) and just three animal species (cattle, pigs and poultry) predominate in current crop and livestock production systems; these species together provide more than 60% of all energy and protein intake by humans[8]. The success of these species is related to their high yield potential, nutritive value, versatility and to globalization. The increasing homogeneity of food sources has been implicated in decreasing the genetic resources, and is seen as a risk for future food supply[9,10].
Tab.1  
Advantages Disadvantages
Greater buffer against market price fluctuations Greater requirement of expertise (double expertise needed)
Greater buffer against climate fluctuations Greater investment in diverse equipment
Greater nutrient recycling due to more direct soil-crop-animal manure relations Less opportunities for benefiting from economies of scale
More diversified income sources
More consistent labor demand
Better weed and disease control
Alternative use for low-quality roughage
Greater sources of security and savings
Greater investment options
Greater social functions
Tab.2  Advantages and disadvantages of mixed crop-animal systems compared to specialized crop and specialized livestock production systems[11]
Livestock products Grazing systems (%) Mixed systems (%) Intensive systems (%)
Cattle- milk 32.5 67.5 n.a.
Cattle- beef 30.7 57.1 12.2
Pork n.a. 43.8 56.2
Chicken- meat n.a. 1.8 98.2
Chicken- eggs n.a. 7.9 92.1
Tab.3  Relative share of the production of livestock products in grazing (including pastoral and commercial grazing systems), mixed crop-livestock (including mixed, household and intermediate systems) and intensive systems (including industrial systems and feedlots) in 2010 (source: HLPE, 2016[24])
Fig.2  Changes in the total stock number of dairy and beef cattle, pigs and poultry in the world from 1961 to 2019 (source: FAOSTAT).
Fig.3  Changes in the total population and urban population in China (million) (a), and fertility rate (births per 1,000 population) and average age (years) (b) from 1950 to 2019 (source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Population Prospects: The 2019 Revision).
Fig.4  Changes in total production of wheat, rice, maize, vegetable and fruit (in Mt per year) (a), and in mean fertilizer nitrogen, phosphorus (P2O5) and potassium (K2O) use in China (in Mt per year (b) from 1961 to 2018 (source: FAOSTAT).
Fig.5  Changes in the total production of pork, poultry, beef, mutton and fish (in Mt per year (a), and in total excretion by livestock of manure nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P2O5) and potassium (K2O) in China (in Mt per year) (b) from 1961 to 2018 (source: calculated from FAOSTAT).
Fig.6  Changes in the import of animal-source food (milk powder, cattle beef and pork) (a) (in Mt per year) and the import of feed-source crop (soybean, maize and alfalfa (b) from 1980 to 2019 (source: FAOSTAT).
Fig.7  Livestock density in livestock units (LU) per ha of agricultural land per province in 2013 (source: China Statistical Yearbook).
1 W J Davies, J Shen. Reducing the environmental footprint of food and farming with agriculture green development. Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering., 2020, 7(1): 1–4
https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FASE-2019311
2 Z Bai, W Ma, L Ma, G Velthof, Z Wei, P Havlík, O Oenema, M Lee, F. ZhangChina’s livestock transition: driving forces, impacts, and consequences. Science Advances. 2018, 4: eaar8534
3 S Jin, B Zhang, B Wu, D Han, Y Hu, C Ren, C Zhang, X Wei, Y Wu, A P J Mol, S Reis, B Gu, J Chen. Decoupling livestock and crop production at the household level in China. Nature Sustainability, 2021, 4(1): 48–55
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00596-0
4 M Mazoyer, L Roudart. A History of World Agriculture—From the Neolithic Age to the Current Crisis. London: Earthcan, 2006, 528
5 JB Schiere, L Kater. Mixed crop-livestock farming—a review of traditional technologies based on literature and field experience. FAO Animal Production and Health Papers, 2001, 152
6 J Diamond. Guns, Germs, and Steel: the Fates of Human Societies. New York: Norton, 1997, 494
7 J Diamond. Evolution, consequences and future of plant and animal domestication. Nature, 2002, 418(6898): 700–707
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01019 pmid: 12167878
8 OECD/FAO. OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2020-2029, Rome: OECD Publishing; Paris: FAO, 2020
https://doi.org/10.1787/1112c23b-en
9 C K Khoury, A D Bjorkman, H Dempewolf, J Ramirez-Villegas, L Guarino, A Jarvis, L H Rieseberg, P C Struik. Increasing homogeneity in global food supplies and the implications for food security. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2014, 111(11): 4001–4006
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1313490111 pmid: 24591623
10 FAO. The future of food and agriculture—trends and challenges. Rome: FAO, 2017
11 H Van Keulen, H Schiere. Crop-livestock systems: old wine in new bottles? In: Fisher T, Ed. New directions for a diverse planet. Brisbane, Australia: Proceedings of the 4th International Crop Science Congress, 2004
12 M Herrero, P K Thornton, A M Notenbaert, S Wood, S Msangi, H A Freeman, D Bossio, J Dixon, M Peters, J van de Steeg, J Lynam, P Parthasarathy Rao, S Macmillan, B Gerard, J McDermott, C Seré, M Rosegrant. Smart investments in sustainable food production: revisiting mixed crop-livestock systems. Science, 2010, 327(5967): 822–825
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183725 pmid: 20150490
13 FAO. The State of Food and Agriculture. Innovation in Family Farming. Rome: FAO, 2014
14 B E Graeub, M J Chappell, H Wittman, S Ledermann, R Bezner Kerr, B Gemmill-Herren. The state of family farms in the world. World Development, 2016, 87: 1–15
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.05.012
15 R D Garrett, J Ryschawy, L W Bell, O Cortner, J Ferreira, A V N Garik, J D B Gil, L Klerkx, M Moraine, C A Peterson, J C dos Reis, J F Valentim. Drivers of decoupling and recoupling of crop and livestock systems at farm and territorial scales. Ecology and Society, 2020, 25(1): art24
https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11412-250124
16 E Frankema. Africa and the Green Revolution. A Global Historical Perspective. NJAS Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 2014, 70–71: 17–24
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2014.01.003
17 R E Evenson, D Gollin. Assessing the impact of the green revolution, 1960 to 2000. Science, 2003, 300(5620): 758–762
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1078710 pmid: 12730592
18 P L Pingali. Green revolution: impacts, limits, and the path ahead. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2012, 109(31): 12302–12308
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0912953109 pmid: 22826253
19 C Delgado, M Rosegrant, H Steinfeld, S Ehui, C Courbois. Livestock to 2020: the next food revolution. Washington DC, USA: Food, Agriculture and the Environment Discussion Paper 28, Food, Agriculture, and the Environment International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), 1999
20 H Steinfeld, H A Mooney, F Schneider, L E Neville. Livestock in a Changing Landscape. Drivers, Consequences and Responses. California, USA: Island Press, 2010
21 J Wang, Q Liu, Y Hou, W Qin, J P Lesschen, F Zhang, O Oenema. International trade of animal feed and its relationships with livestock density and N and P balances at country level. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 2018, 110(1): 197–211
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-017-9885-3
22 M G Chung, K Kapsar, K A Frank, J Liu. The spatial and temporal dynamics of global meat trade networks. Scientific Reports, 2020, 10(1): 16657
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-73591-2 pmid: 33028857
23 A Uwizeye, I J M de Boer, C I Opio, R P O Schulte, A Falcucci, G Tempio, F Teillard, F Casu, M Rulli, J N Galloway, A Leip, J W Erisman, T P Robinson, H Steinfeld, P J Gerber. Nitrogen emissions along global livestock supply chains. Nature Food, 2020, 1(7): 437–446
https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-0113-y
24 HLPE. Sustainable agricultural development for food security and nutrition: what roles for livestock? A report by the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security. Rome: HLPE, 2016
25 P L M van Horne. Competitiveness of the EU poultry meat sector, base year 2017; International comparison of production costs. Wageningen, the Netherlands: Wageningen Economic Research, 2018, 116
26 A Mottet, G Tempio. Global poultry production: current state and future outlook and challenges. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 2017, 73(2): 1–12
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933917000071
27 H Steinfeld, P Gerber, T Wassenaar, V Castel, M Rosales, C de Haan. Livestock’s long shadow. Environmental issues and options. Livestock, environment and development initiative. Rome: FAO, 2006
28 C A Peterson, L Deiss, A C M Gaudin. Commercial integrated crop-livestock systems achieve comparable crop yields to specialized production systems: A meta-analysis. PLoS One, 2020, 15(5): e0231840
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231840 pmid: 32379773
29 D Tilman, M Clark. Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature, 2014, 515(7528): 518–522
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13959 pmid: 25383533
30 B F Kim, R E Santo, A P Scatterday, J P Fry, C M Synk, S R Cebron, M M Mekonnen, A Y Hoekstra, S de Pee, M W Bloem, R A Neff, K E Nachman. Country-specific dietary shifts to mitigate climate and water crises. Global Environmental Change, 2020, 62: 101926
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.05.010
31 S Gietel-Basten, X Han, Y Cheng. Assessing the impact of the “one-child policy” in China: a synthetic control approach. PLoS One, 2019, 14(11): e0220170
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220170 pmid: 31693666
32 Z Bai, X Jin, O Oenema, M R F Lee, J Zhao, L. MaImpacts of African Swine Fever on food consumption patterns and water quality in China. 2021 (in Press)
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed