1) The document discusses crop-livestock interactions and conservation agriculture practices in the Indo-Gangetic Plains of South Asia, focusing on synergies and tradeoffs.
2) It analyzes data from village surveys conducted in 2005 on household assets, technology use, and crop residue management practices across a gradient of agricultural intensification.
3) The findings show that zero-tillage is more common where farms are larger and mechanized, while rice straw is less commonly used for livestock feed when harvesting is more mechanized. Crop residue management practices are largely incompatible with conservation agriculture.
Conservation agriculture, livestock and livelihood strategies in the Indo-Gangetic Plains of South Asia: Synergies and tradeoffs
1. Conservation agriculture, livestock and livelihood strategies in the Indo-Gangetic Plains of South Asia: Synergies and tradeoffs Olaf Erenstein a , Nils Teufel b & Arindam Samaddar ab ( a CIMMYT, b ILRI, o.erenstein@cgiar.org) SLP Annual Meeting Addis Ababa, Ethiopia,1-2 December 2009
23. Characteristics of zero-tillage use (in wheat, only UGP) use of zero tillage (n) yes no p assets farm size [ha] 4.4 (109) 2.0 (303) 0.00 large ruminants 5.6 (109) 3.9 (303) 0.00 characteristics age hh head [y] 49 (109) 50 (302) 0.77 education hh head [y] 7.1 (109) 4.9 (303) 0.00 expenses [USD/(c*d)] 0.84 (109) 0.58 (303) 0.00 technology combine [% paddy area] 73 (109) 38 (303) 0.00 straw use leftover [%] 8 (54) 12 (98) 0.06 (paddy, combine) burnt [%] 83 (54) 65 (98) 0.00 fed [%] 7 (54) 11 (98) 0.21
24. Determinants of using paddy straw as feed (only UGP) dep. variable: % paddy straw on field being fed standardized beta p farm size [ha] -0.07 0.30 large ruminants 0.26 0.00 age hh head [y] -0.12 0.02 education hh head [y] -0.01 0.85 expenses [USD pc/d] -0.07 0.24 ZT use [% wheat area] -0.05 0.32 combine use [% paddy area] -0.56 0.00 milk sold [%] -0.18 0.01 adjusted r 2 = 0.41, n=225