Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Limitations and Potentialities of Organic or Non-conventional Milk Production in Ecuador

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Communication, Smart Technologies and Innovation for Society

Part of the book series: Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies ((SIST,volume 252))

  • 865 Accesses

Abstract

Hunger, poverty, and production are at the core of worldwide problems; this makes it imperative to promote sustainable agro-ecosystems. There is evidence that dairy production under the conventional model is unsustainable, but there is an organic alternative. The aim of this research was to define the limiting and enhancing factors of organic milk production to guide the sustainability of livestock activity in Ecuador. Considering limits, inputs, outputs, and interactions, as well as production factors in the social, environmental, and economic dimensions, we describe the alternative practices of three productive units are described through participant observation, interviews, and laboratory analysis of forage, soil, milk, and water. The results show that there are social factors, such as productive orientation about available resources and the associativity, that are a determinant driver for eliminating dependencies in the establishment of inputs and the commercialization of milk. Environmental factors include the recovery of the biodiversity of forage species in silvopastoral systems that restore biological cycles and soil fertility. Economic factors relate to the availability of resources for acquiring or breeding animals under the non-conventional system and for certification processes. We conclude that organic milk production can be implemented as in the case of the Marullacta farm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. UNFPA: World Population Dashboard, https://www.unfpa.org/data/world-population-dashboard

  2. The World Bank: Poverty, https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview

  3. M. Altieri, C. Nicholls, Agroecología: única esperanza para la soberanía alimentaria y la resiliencia socioecológica. Agroecología. 7, 65–83 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  4. ONU: Transformar nuestro mundo: la agenda 2030 para el desarrollo sostenible. in Resolución Aprobada Por La Asamblea General Del 25 De Septiembre Del 2015. p. 40 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  5. G. Gallopín, Sostenibilidad y desarrollo sostenible: un enfoque sistémico, División de desarrollo sostenible y asentamientos humanos (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  6. P. Zarta Ávila, La 1sustentabilidad o sostenibilidad: un concepto poderoso para la humanidad. Tabula Rasa. 409–423 (2018). https://doi.org/10.25058/20112742.n28.18

  7. R. Laserna, J. Cortés, C. Ledo, A. Ramírez, R. Valdivieso, W. Hurtado, J. Casazola, F. Calderón, Sostenibilidad y desarrollo humano. La calidad de vida en Cochabamba. Los amigos del libro/CERES, Cochabamba (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  8. J.M. Naredo, Sobre el origen, el uso y el contenido del término “Sostenible.” Doc. Soc. 102, 48–57 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  9. M. Altieri, C. Nicholls, Agroecología: teoría y práctica para una agricultura sustentable, México (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  10. H. Mancini, L. van den Berg, I. Cardoso, A. Vermue, F. Bianchi, M. Peña-Claros, P. Tittonell, Understanding farm diversity to promote agroecological transitions. Sustainability. 10, 1–20 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. E. Sevilla, Agroecología y desarrollo rural sustentable: una propuesta desde Latino América, in Sarandon (ed.) Agroecología; el camino para la agricultura. Argentina (2000), pp. 1–28

    Google Scholar 

  12. A. Smith, S. Snapp, R. Chikowo, P. Thorne, M. Bekunda, J. Glover, Measuring sustainable intensification in smallholder agroecosystems: a review. Glob. Food Sec. 12, 127–138 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2016.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. C. Bockstaller, L. Guichard, D. Makowski, A. Aveline, P. Girardin, S. Plantureux, Agri-Environmental Indicators to Assess Cropping and Farming Systems: a review BT–sustainable agriculture. Presented at the (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. R. Martínez, Agroecología: atributos de sustentabilidad. InterSedes Rev. las Sedes Reg. III, 25–45 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  15. D. Silva, E. Vasques, L. Nogueira, D. De Oliveira, A sustainability rereading of agrarian production systems. Interações (Campo Gd. 18, 43 (2017). https://doi.org/10.20435/inter.v18i4.1527

  16. P. Vasquez, M. Vignolles, Establecimiento agroproductivo ecologico vs. agricultura convencional: Partido de Tandil, provincia de Buenos Aires. Soc. Nat. 27, 267–280 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-451320150206

  17. IFOAM: Normas para la producción y el procesamiento orgánicos. (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Á. Noguera, F. Salmerón, N. Reyes, Bases teórico-metodológicas para el diseño de sistemas agroecológicos. Rev FCA UNCUYO. 51, 273–293 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  19. P. Tittonell, Las transiciones agroecológicas: múltiples escalas, niveles y desafíos. Rev. FCA UNCUYO. 51, 231–246 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  20. H. Hamadani, A. Khan, Organic dairy farming—an overview. J. Livest. Sci. 6, 4–9 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  21. S. Olarte, La producción de leche orgánica en la región Puno: una alternativa de desarrollo sostenible. Mundo Agrar. 13 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  22. S.J. Sarandón, Potentialities, challenges and limitations of agroecological research as a new paradigm in agricultural sciences [Potencialidades, desafíos y limitaciones de la investigación agroecológica como un nuevo paradigma en las ciencias agrarias]. Rev. la Fac. Ciencias Agrar. 51, 383–394 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  23. P. Castañeda, Sistematización y generación de conocimientos en trabajo social. Aportes metodológicos a la formación profesional. Altern. Cuad. Trab. Soc. 23 (2015). https://doi.org/10.14198/altern2015.22.02

  24. B. de Sousa, Descolonizar el saber, reinventar el poder. Ediciones Trilce, Montevideo–Uruguay (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  25. L. Bertalanffy, Teoría general de sistemas. (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  26. AGROCALIDAD: Instructivo de la normativa general para promover y regular la producción orgánica-ecológica-biológica en el Ecuador (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  27. G. Pardo, J. Aibar, P. Ciria, C. Lacasta, J. Lezaún, C. Zaragoza, Organic versus conventional methods of fertilization and weed control in a long term rotation of cereals in semiarid Spain. Chil. J. Agric. Res. 71, 187–194 (2011). https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-58392011000200002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. A. Escalante, G. Pérez, C. Hidalgo, J. López, J. Campo, E. Valtierra, J. Etchevers, Biocarbón (biochar) I: naturaleza, historia, fabricación y uso en el suelo. Terra Latinoam. 34, 367–382 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  29. A. Concilco, M. Moreno, M. García, H. Quiroga, O. García, Influence of biochar applied to soil on yield and quality attributes of fodder oats (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  30. A. Moreno, J. Cantú, J. Reyes, V. Contreras, Forage maize nutritional quality according to organic and inorganic. Sci. Agropecu. 8, 127–135 (2017). https://doi.org/10.17268/sci.agropecu.2017.02.05

  31. J. Iglesias, F. Funes, O. Toral, S. Milera, M. Milera, Diseños agrosilvopastoriles ene l contexto de desarrollo de una ganadería sustentable. Apuntes para el conocimiento. Pastos y Forrajes. 34, 241–258 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  32. P. Del Pozo, V. de Melo, E. Ortega, El análisis emergético como herramienta para evaluar la sustentabilidad en dos sistemas productivos. Rev. Ciencias Técnicas Agropecu. 23, 59–63 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  33. C. Mbow, M. van Noordwijk, R. Prabhu, T. Simons, Knowledge gaps and research needs concerning agroforestry’s contribution to Sustainable Development Goals in Africa. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 162–170 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. A. Piñeiro, J. Canul, J. Alayón, A. Chay, A. Ayala, C. Aguilar, F. Solorio, J. Ku, Potential of condensed tannins for the reduction of emissions of enteric methane and their effect on ruminant productivity. Arch Med Vet. 47, 263–272 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. C. Lascano, E. Cárdenas, Alternativas para mitigação de emissão de metano em sistemas de criação de animais domésticos. Rev. Bras. Zootec. 39, 175–182 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982010001300020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. V. Wanniatie, M. Sudarwanto, T. Purnawarman, D. Jayanegara, Kualitas susu dari peternakan organik. Wartazoa. 27, 125–134 (2017). https://doi.org/10.14334/wartazoa.v27i3.1597

  37. J. Carmona, D. Bolívar, L. Giraldo, El gas metano en la producción ganadera y alternativas para medir sus emisiones y aminorar su impacto a nivel ambiental y productivo. Rev. Colomb. Ciencias Pecu. 18, 49–63 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  38. A. Croissant, S. Washburn, L. Dean, M. Drake, Chemical properties and consumer perception of fluid milk from conventional and pasture-based production systems. J. Dairy Sci. 90, 4992–4953 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0456

  39. G. Haas, Evaluacion del balance de nutrientes de las granjas de produccion lacteos organicos en diferentes niveles de intensidad en Alemania. Agric. Renov. y Sist. Aliment. 223–232 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  40. H. Ayrle, M. Mevissen, M. Kaske, H. Nathues, N. Gruetzner, M. Melzig, M. Walkenhorst, Medicinal plants—prophylactic and therapeutic options for gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases in calves and piglets? A systematic review. BMC Vet. Res. 12, (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/S12917-016-0714-8

  41. N. Rivero, A. Jaramillo, M. Rivas, G. Ballesteros, A. Zaragoza, Actividad antihelmintica de la vaina de Leucaena leucocephala sobre nematodos gastrointestinales de ovinos (in vitro). Abanico Vet. 9, 1–9 (2018). https://doi.org/10.21929/abavet2019.95

  42. J. Da Silva, C. Passos, A. Da Fonseca, J. Guimarães, Gastrointestinal helminths in calves and cows in an organic milk production system. Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Veterinária. 21, 87–91 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1590/s1984-29612012000200003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. I. Blanco, T. Lundh, K. Holtenius, N. Fall, U. Emanuelson, The status of essential elements and associations with milk yield and the occurrence of mastitis in organic and conventional dairy herds. Livest. Sci. 168, 120–127 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2014.07.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. R. Almeida, C. Coutinho, Uso de medicamentos homeopáticos para o tratamento da mastite bovina : Revisão. pubvet. 12, 1–10 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  45. A. Villa, S. Bracamonte, Procesos de aprendizaje y modernización productiva en el agro del noroeste de México: los casos de la agricultura comercial de la Costa de Hermosillo, Sonora y la agricultura orgánica de la zona sur de Baja California Sur. Estud. Front. 14, 217–254 (2013). https://doi.org/10.21670/ref.2013.27.a08

  46. A. Alves, A. Quintão, L. Takao, L. Magalhães, Análise de desempenho econômico da produção orgânica de leite: estudo de caso no Distrito Federal. Ciência e Agrotecnologia. 33, 567–573 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1590/s1413-70542009000200032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. W. McBride, C. Greene, Costs of organic milk production on U.S. dairy farms. Rev. Agric. Econ. 31, 793–813 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9353.2009.01467.x

  48. M. Bottes, Conversion to organic farming decreases the vulnerability of dairy farms. Agron. Sustain. Dev. (2019)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. c/José Gutiérrez Abascal 2, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28006, Madrid, España

    Narcisa Requelme & Ana Afonso

Authors
  1. Narcisa Requelme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ana Afonso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Narcisa Requelme .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. ISEG, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Álvaro Rocha

  2. University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain

    Paulo Carlos López-López

  3. Universidad Politécnica Salesiana, Cuenca, Ecuador

    Juan Pablo Salgado-Guerrero

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Requelme, N., Afonso, A. (2022). Limitations and Potentialities of Organic or Non-conventional Milk Production in Ecuador. In: Rocha, Á., López-López, P.C., Salgado-Guerrero, J.P. (eds) Communication, Smart Technologies and Innovation for Society . Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 252. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4126-8_21

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation