首页> 外文期刊>Field Crops Research >The intrinsic plasticity of farm businesses and their resilience to change. An Australian example
【24h】

The intrinsic plasticity of farm businesses and their resilience to change. An Australian example

机译:农场企业的内在可塑性及其对变化的适应力。澳大利亚的例子

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

This paper examines the idea that plasticity in farm management introduces resilience to change and allows farm businesses to perform when operating in highly variable environments. We also argue for the need to develop and apply more integrative assessments of farm performance that combine the use of modelling tools with deliberative processes involving farmers and researchers in a co-learning process, to more effectively identify and implement more productive and resilient farm businesses.In a plastic farming system, farm management is highly contingent on environmental conditions. In plastic farming systems farm managers constantly vary crops and inputs based on the availability of limited and variable resources (e.g. land, water, finances, labour, machinery, etc.), and signals from its operating environment (e.g. climate, markets), with the objective of maximising a number of, often competing, objectives (e.g. maximise profits, minimise risks, etc.). In contrast in more rigid farming systems farm management is more calendar driven and relatively fixed sequences of crops are regularly followed over time and across the farm. Here we describe the application of a whole farm simulation model to (i) compare, in silico, the sensitivity of two farming systems designs of contrasting levels of plasticity, operating in two contrasting environments, when exposed to a stressor in the form of climate change scenarios:(ii) investigate the presence of interactions and feedbacks at the field and farm levels capable of modifying the intensity and direction of the responses to climate signals: and (iii) discuss the need for the development and application of more integrative assessments in the analysis of impacts and adaptation options to climate change.In both environments, the more plastic farm management strategy had higher median profits and was less risky for the baseline and less intensive climate change scenarios (2030). However, for the more severe climate change scenarios (2070), the benefit of plastic strategies tended to disappear. These results suggest that, to a point, farming systems having higher levels of plasticity would enable farmers to more effectively respond to climate shifts, thus ensuring the economic viability of the farm business. Though, as the intensity of the stress increases (e.g. 2070 climate change scenario) more significant changes in the farming system might be required to adapt. We also found that in the case studies analysed here, most of the impacts from the climate change scenarios on farm profit and economic risk originated from important reductions in cropping intensity and changes in crop mix rather than from changes in the yields of individual crops. Changes in cropping intensity and crop mix were explained by the combination of reductions in the number of sowing opportunities around critical times in the cropping calendar, and to operational constraints at the whole farm level i.e. limited work capacity in an environment having fewer and more concentrated sowing opportunities. This indicates that indirect impacts from shifts in climate on farm operations can be more important than direct impacts from climate on the yield of individual crops. The results suggest that due to the complexity of farm businesses, impact assessments and opportunities for adaptation to climate change might also need to be pursued at higher integration levels than the crop or the field. We conclude that plasticity can be a desirable characteristic in farming systems operating in highly variable environments, and that integrated whole farm systems analyses of impacts and adaptation to climate change are required to identify important interactions between farm management decision rules, availability of resources, and farmer's preference. Crown Copyright
机译:本文探讨了农场管理中的可塑性引入了变化的弹性并允许农场企业在高度可变的环境中运行时执行的想法。我们还认为,有必要开发和应用更全面的农场绩效评估,将建模工具的使用与农民和研究人员在共同学习过程中的审议过程结合起来,以更有效地识别和实施更具生产力和弹性的农场业务。在塑料耕作系统中,农场管理在很大程度上取决于环境条件。在塑料耕作系统中,农场管理者根据有限和可变资源(例如土地,水,财政,劳动力,机械等)的可用性以及其经营环境(例如气候,市场)发出的信号,不断改变作物和投入物。最大化多个经常相互竞争的目标的目标(例如,最大化利润,最小化风险等)。相比之下,在更严格的耕作制度中,农场管理受日历的驱动更大,并且随着时间的流逝并在整个农场中定期遵循相对固定的农作物序列。在这里,我们描述了整个农场模拟模型的应用,用于(i)在计算机上比较两种可耕种系统设计的可塑性水平相反的敏感性,当暴露于气候变化形式的压力源时,可在两种不同的环境中运行情景:(ii)调查能够改变气候信号响应强度和方向的田间和农场一级的相互作用和反馈的存在;以及(iii)讨论在土地开发和应用中需要进行更多综合评估的必要性在两种环境下,塑料农场管理策略越多,中位数利润就越高,基准线风险就越小,气候变化情景越集中(2030年)。但是,对于更严峻的气候变化情景(2070年),塑料战略的好处往往消失了。这些结果表明,在某种程度上,具有较高可塑性的耕作制度将使农民能够更有效地应对气候变化,从而确保了农场经营的经济可行性。但是,随着胁迫强度的增加(例如2070年气候变化的情景),可能需要对耕作系统进行更大的改变以适应。我们还发现,在这里分析的案例研究中,气候变化情景对农场利润和经济风险的大部分影响,都来自作物种植强度的显着降低和作物结构的变化,而不是单个农作物产量的变化。播种密度和作物结构的变化可以通过减少播种日历关键时刻周围播种机会数量的减少,以及整个农场一级的操作限制(即在播种量越来越少且集中的环境中工作能力有限)的组合来解释机会。这表明,气候变化对农场经营的间接影响比气候变化对单个农作物产量的直接影响更为重要。结果表明,由于农场经营的复杂性,可能还需要以比农作物或田间更高的综合水平进行影响评估和适应气候变化的机会。我们得出结论,可塑性可能是在高度可变的环境中运行的耕作系统的理想特征,并且需要对影响和对气候变化的适应性进行整体农场系统综合分析,以确定农场管理决策规则,资源可用性和农民之间的重要相互作用。偏爱。皇冠版权

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号