Modelling of cow-calf systems under land-sharing and land-sparing strategies in the Argentinean Chaco

Le résumé fourni par la source

In the Argentinean Chaco region, deforestation continues to be the main way to achieve higher production but at the expense of carbon, biodiversity, and other losses. We evaluated potential trends of selected productive and environmental indicators of agroforestry systems in the region, specifically, a Forest management integrated with livestock system (MBGI; a combination of land-sharing and land-sparing strategies) and a Livestock management on pastures plus forest reserves system (MGP + B; forest reserve areas on 70, 50, and 30% of the farm; land-sparing strategies). Trade-offs and synergies between indicators and the influence of rainfall regimes were also explored. Using system dynamics methodology, we partially developed and integrated a beef cattle model, a soil organic carbon model and a native forest carbon dynamic model to represent typical beef cattle systems in the region. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and GHG balance, organic carbon stocks, and land area required per unit of animal production varied across agroforestry systems (MBGI and MGP + B systems) and ecoregions (Dry and Wet Chaco). Under the current modelling conditions, our simulation results show that no single system simultaneously maximized all productive indicators while minimizing all environmental impacts over the long term. Nevertheless, MBGI, MGP + B70, and MGP + B50 consistently showed a more favorable balance between productive and environmental outcomes across the indicators evaluated. More specifically, the MGP + B70 and MGP + B50 systems were identified as promising alternatives for cow-calf farms and native forest. Forest management integrated with livestock and the livestock management of pastures with forest reserves in at least 50% of the farm area could be key systems and strategies to balance food production and carbon conservation in the Argentinean Chaco region.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.