Tropical Animal Health and Production

, Volume 47, Issue 6, pp 1187–1194 | Cite as

Assessment of the sustainability of dual-purpose farms by the IDEA method in the subtropical area of central Mexico

  • Isela Guadalupe Salas-Reyes
  • Carlos Manuel Arriaga-Jordán
  • Samuel Rebollar-Rebollar
  • Anastacio García-Martínez
  • Benito Albarrán-Portillo
Regular Articles
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess the sustainability of 10 dual-purpose cattle farms in a subtropical area of central Mexico. The IDEA method (Indicateurs de Durabilité des Exploitations Agricoles) was applied, which includes the agroecological, socio-territorial and economic scales (scores from 0 to 100 points per scale). A sample of 47 farms from a total of 91 registered in the local livestock growers association was analysed with principal component analysis and cluster analysis. From results, 10 farms were selected for the in-depth study herein reported, being the selection criterion continuous milk production throughout the year. Farms had a score of 88 and 86 points for the agroecological scale in the rainy and dry seasons. In the socio-territorial scale, scores were 73 points for both seasons, being the component of employment and services the strongest. Scores for the economic scale were 64 and 56 points for the rainy and dry seasons, respectively, when no economic cost for family labour is charged, which decreases to 59 and 45 points when an opportunity cost for family labour is considered. Dual-purpose farms in the subtropical area of central Mexico have a medium sustainability, with the economic scale being the limiting factor, and an area of opportunity.

Keywords

Agroecological Socio-territorial Economic Sustainability Assessment 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors express their gratitude to the farmers and their families participating in this work for their willingness and kindness in being part of the project. Their collaboration was fundamental in achieving the objectives. This work was undertaken thanks to the funding by the Mexican National Council for Science and Technology (Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología—CONACYT) through grant 129449 CB-2009 and to the funding by Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México through the grants UAEM 3293/2012M and 1003/2012 RCA. Thanks also to CONACYT for the grant that enabled Isela Guadalupe Salas-Reyes to undertake her postgraduate studies. We are also grateful to the staff at CU UAEM Temascaltepec for their support and collaboration in the laboratory work and to all members of the research team on dual-purpose systems.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Albarrán-Portillo, B., Rebollar-Rebollar, S., García-Martínez, A., Rojo-Rubio, R., Avilés-Nova, F., and Arriaga-Jordán, C.M. 2015. Socioeconomic and productive characterization of dual-purpose farms oriented to milk production in a subtropical region of Mexico. Tropical Animal Health and Production. On line. DOI  10.1007/s11250-014-0753-8.
  2. Altieri, M.A. 1994. Bases agroecológicas para una producción agrícola sustentable. Agricultura Técnica 54: 371–386.Google Scholar
  3. Bir, A., Yakhlef, H., Ghozlane, F., Madani, T., et Marie, M. 2011: Durabilite des systemes agropastoraux bovins dans le contexte semi aride des hautes plaines setifiennes (Algerie). Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 23, Article #247. Retrieved January 21, 2015, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd23/12/bir23247.htm.
  4. Cervantes Escoto, F., Villegas de Gante A., Cesín Vargas, A., & Espinoza Ortega, A. 2013. Los quesos mexicanos genuinos: Patrimonio que debe rescatarse. 2ª. Edición. Texcoco, México: Colegio de Postgraduados.Google Scholar
  5. Espinosa-García, J.A., Wiggins, S., González-Orozco, A.T., and Aguilar-Barradas, U. 2004. Sustentabilidad económica a nivel de empresa: aplicación a unidades familiares de producción de leche en México. Técnica Pecuaria 42: 55 – 70.Google Scholar
  6. Espinoza-Ortega, A., Espinosa-Ayala, E., Bastida-López, J., Castañeda-Martínez, T., and Arriaga-Jordán, C.M. 2007. Small-scale dairy farming in the highlands of central Mexico: Technical, economic and social aspects and their impact on poverty. Experimental Agriculture 43: 241–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fadul-Pacheco, L., Wattiaux, M., Espinoza-Ortega, A., Sánchez-Vera, E., and Arriaga-Jordán, C.M. 2013. Evaluation of sustainability of smallholder dairy productions systems in the highlands of Mexico during the rainy season. Agroecology and Sustainability Food Systems 37: 882–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. FIRA (Fideicomisos Instituidos en Relación con la Agricultura). 2010. Panorama Agroalimentario. Dirección de Análisis económico y Sectorial. Leche y Lácteos 2010. http://www.fira.gob.mx/index.jsp (accessed May 20th 2014).
  9. García-Martínez, A., Olaizola, A., Bernués, A., 2008.Trajectories of evolution and drivers of change in European mountain cattle farming systems. Animal 3: 152–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hair, J.F.J., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. 2006. Multivariate data analysis. International Edition. 6Ed. Prentice Hall International. New Jersey. United States of America. 897 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Hayo, M.G., Van der Werf, Petit, J. 2002. Evaluation of the environmental impact of agriculture at the farm level: a comparison and analysis of 12 indicator-based methods. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 93: 131–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hernández, S.R., Fernández, C.C., and Baptista, L.P., 2004. Metodología de la investigación. 3ª ed. McGraw-Hill Interamericana. México, 705Google Scholar
  13. Hernández-Morales, C., Hernández-Montes, A., Villegas de Gante, A.Z., and Aguirre-Mandujano, E. 2011. Socio-technical production process of Zacazonapan Añejo cheese, a traditional cheese from the State of Mexico. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias 2: 161–176.Google Scholar
  14. Instituto Nacional de Ecología. 1991. Comisión intersecretarial para el control del proceso y uso de plaguicidas, fertilizantes y sustancias químicas (CICOPLAFEST), México. http://www.ine.gob.mx/sistema/plaguicidas/index (accessed February 8 2012).
  15. M’Hamdi, N., Aloulou, R., Hedhly, M., and Ben Hamouda, M. 2009. Évaluation de la durabilité des exploitations laitieres tunisiennes par la méthode IDEA. Biotechnologie, Agronomie, Société et. Environnement 13: 221–228Google Scholar
  16. McDermott, J.J., Staal, S.J., Freeman, H.A., Herrero, M., and Van de Steeg, J.A. 2010. Sustaining intensification of smallholder livestock systems in the tropics. Livestock Science 130: 95 – 109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Meul, M., Van Passel, S., Nevens, F., Dessein, J., Rogge, E., Mulier, A., and Van Hauwermeiren, A. 2008. MOTIFS: A monitoring tool for integrated farm sustainability. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 28: 321 – 332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Olivares-Pérez, J., Avilés-Nova, F., Albarrán-Portillo, B., Castelán-Ortega, O.A., and Rojas-Hernández, S. 2013. Use of three fodder trees in the feeding of goats in the subhumid tropics in Mexico. Tropical Animal Health and Production 45: 821–828.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Parsons, D., Nicholson, C.F., Blake, R.W., Ketterings, Q.M., Ramirez-Aviles, L., Fox, D.G., Tedeschi, L.O., and Cherney, J.H. 2011. Development and evaluation of an integrated simulation model for assessing smallholder crop-livestock production in Yucatan, Mexico. Agricultural Systems 104: 1 – 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pérez, C.L. 2005. Técnicas estadísticas con SPSS 12. Aplicaciones al análisis de datos. Prentice Hall. Madrid, España. 802 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Pimentel, D.C., and Kounang, N. 1998. Ecology of soil erosion in ecosystems. Ecosystems 1: 416–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Posadas-Domínguez, R.R., Arriaga-Jordán, C.M., and Martínez-Castañeda, F.E. 2014. Contribution of labour to the profitability and competitiveness on small-scale dairy production systems in central México. Tropical Animal Health and Production 46: 235–240.Google Scholar
  23. Rebollar, S., Hernández-Martínez, J., González-Razo, F., Albarrán-Portillo, B., and Rojo-Rubio, R. 2011. Canales y Márgenes de Comercialización del Queso Añejo en Zacazonapan. Archivos de Zootecnia 60: 883–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. SAGARPA (Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca Y Alimentación). 1997. Centro de apoyo al desarrollo rural 04. Otzoloapan, Estado de México. http://www.Sagarpa.gob.mx (accessed September 14 2013).
  25. Tapia V, L.M., Tiscareño L, M., Salinas R, J., Velázquez V, M., Vega P, A., and Guillen A, H. 2002. Respuesta de la cobertura residual del suelo a la erosión hídrica y la sostenibilidad del suelo, en laderas agrícolas. Terra Latinoamericana 20: 449–457.Google Scholar
  26. United Nations (UN), 1987. Our Common Future, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Annex to General Assembly document A/42/427. http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm Accessed May 2, 2011.
  27. Van Cauwenbergh, N., Biala, K., Bielders, C., Brouckaert, V., Franchois, L., García-Cidad, V., Hermy, M., Mathijs, E., Muys, B., Reijnders, J., Sauvenier, X., Valckx, J., Vanclooster, M., Van des Veken, B., Wauters, E., and Peeters, A. 2007. SAFE-a hierarchical framework for assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 120: 229 – 242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Van Passel, S., Nevens, F., Mathijb, E., and Van Huylenbroeck, G. 2007. Measuring farm sustainability and explaining differences in sustainable efficiency. Ecological Economics 62: 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vilaboa-Arroniz, J., Días-River, P., Ruíz-Rosado, O., Platas-Rosado, D.E., González-Muñoz, S. y Juárez-Lagunes, F. 2009. Caracterización socioeconómica y tecnológica de los agroecosistemas con bovinos de doble propósito de la región del Papaloapan, Veracruz, México. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 10: 53–62.Google Scholar
  30. Vilain, L., Girardin, P., Mouchet, C., Viaux, P., and Zahm, F. 2008. La méthode IDEA, indicateurs de durabilité des explotations agricoles: guide d’utilisation, Dijon version 3. Educagri. Ed. http://www.idea.portea.fr/ (accessed February 2013).
  31. Yamamoto, W., Ap Dewi, I., and Ibrahim, M. 2007. Effects of silvopastoral areas on milk production at dual-purpose farms at the semi-humid old agricultural frontier in central Nicaragua. Agricultural Systems 94: 368–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zahm, F., Vilain, L., Girardin, F., Viaux, P., and Mouchet, C. 2008. Farm sustainability assessment using the IDEA method: from de concept of farm sustainability to case studies of French farms. Sustainability Development 16: 271–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isela Guadalupe Salas-Reyes
    • 1
  • Carlos Manuel Arriaga-Jordán
    • 2
  • Samuel Rebollar-Rebollar
    • 1
  • Anastacio García-Martínez
    • 1
  • Benito Albarrán-Portillo
    • 1
  1. 1.Centro Universitario UAEM TemascaltepecTemascaltepecMéxico
  2. 2.Instituto de Ciencias Agropecuarias y Rurales (ICAR)Universidad Autónoma del Estado de MéxicoTolucaMéxico

Personalised recommendations