Production Functions and Factors in Agroecosystems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
A Systems Approach to Agroecology
  • 369 Accesses

Abstract

Agroecological production systems are often described as being knowledge-intensive or management-intensive. However, what does the term ‘intensity’ mean in agroecosystems analysis? It can be simply defined as the degree to which a production factor is used in a production process, relative to other production factors and output productivity. Land, labour, and capital are the classical production factors in agriculture, and the way in which they are combined to realize a certain production determines different levels and forms of agricultural intensification and productivity. Nowadays, knowledge is considered as a fourth production factor. The use of agricultural knowledge—traditional, scientific, popular, etc.—may replace or reduce the need for other production factors to achieve similar levels of productivity. A common misconception related to intensification is the assumption that family or smallholder agriculture is less intensive than industrial agriculture. This chapter will provide concepts and tools to analyse that. Another concept closely related to production factors is that of resources. In agricultural economics, resources are classified as fixed or long-term (such as land, machinery, infrastructure, irrigation systems, etc.) and operational or short-term resources, which are consumed completely during one production process (e.g., seeds, fertilizers). This view is strongly rooted in the industrial approach to agriculture that emerged during the green revolution. In agroecology, we tend to see most resources as being reproducible (e.g., land can be restored, seeds can be produced locally, nutrients can be recycled, etc.), and we distinguish between internally sourced and externally sourced resources, as well as between biotic resources (e.g., genetic resources, biodiversity, pollen) and abiotic ones (water, nutrients). The differences between these views have several implications for the way in which resource use efficiencies are calculated, especially because a single resource can be used in several processes in the agroecosystem, within a single season or over time. However, to understand how this can be done in agroecology, it is first necessary to know how factor allocation, resource use, and productivity are analysed in classical agronomy. This chapter provides system analytical concepts and methods to assess agricultural intensification, factor productivity, and resource allocation. However, resource allocation analyses are restricted here to land and labour. Financial resources are left out of this chapter, as they are often analysed in light of economic theory, which represents a completely different paradigm compared to systems analysis. Patterns concerning the spatial allocation of biomass and nutrients are discussed in Chap. 7, while trade-offs around the allocation of financial versus other resources are addressed in Chap. 9.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In languages other than English, the term extensive systems is generally used to describe low intensity agriculture, and ‘extensification’ as a trajectory towards lower intensities in the use of production factors.

References

  • Abrell T, Naudin K, Bianchi F, Aragao D, Tittonell P, Corbeels M (2022) Cassava root yield variability in shifting cultivation systems in the eastern Amazon region of Brazil. Exp Agric 58:E38. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479722000333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajayi OO, Akinnifesi F, Sileshi G, Kanjipite W, (2009) Labour inputs and financial profitability of conventional and agroforestry-based soil fertility management practices in Zambia. Agrekon 48. https://doi.org/10.1080/03031853.2009.9523827

  • Bedoussac, Laurent and Justes, Eric, 2010. The efficiency of a durum wheat-winter pea intercrop to improve yield and wheat grain protein concentration depends on N availability during early growth. Plant Soil, vol. 330, n° 1–2, pp. 19–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Boserup E (1965) The conditions of agricultural growth. Aldine, Chicago, 124 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Boserup E (1981) Population and technological change: a study of long-term trends. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter MR (1984) Identification of the inverse relationship between farm size and productivity: an empirical analysis of peasant agricultural production. Oxf Econ Pap 36:131–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chuang FT (1973) An analysis of change of Taiwan’s cultivated land utilization for recent years. Rural Econ Div, JCRR Rep. 21, Taipei, Taiwan

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornia GA (1985) Farm size, land yields and the agricultural production function: an analysis for fifteen develo** countries. World Dev 13(4):513–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple DF (1971) Survey of multiple crop** in less developed nations. United States Department of Agriculture. Washington, DC, FEDS, 108 p

    Google Scholar 

  • De Giusti G, Kristjanson P, Rufino M (2019) Agroforestry as a climate change mitigation practice in smallholder farming: evidence from Kenya. Clim Chang 153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02390-0

  • de Ponti T, Rijk B, van Ittersum MK (2012) The crop yield gap between organic and conventional agriculture. Agric Syst 108:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Wit CT (1982) Simulation of living systems. Simulation of plant growth and crop production. Pudoc, Laboratorium voor Theoretische Productie Ecologie en Agronomie, Wageningen University, Wageningen

    Google Scholar 

  • Debru J (2009) L’abandon de la culture du cotonnier est-il momentané ou définitif? Diagnostic agro-économique d’une petite région agricole dans le bassin de la Bénoué, au Nord Cameroun. Mémoire de Master, AgroParisTech, Paris, France, pp 84

    Google Scholar 

  • Duriaux Chavarría JY (2014) Energy flows in the farming systems of Southern Ethiopia: implications for sustainable intensification. M.Sc. thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis F (1993) Peasant economics. Cambridge Books/Cambridge University Press, number 9780521457118

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank L, Sallis J, Conway T, Chapman J, Saelens B, Bachman W (2006) Multiple pathways from land use to health: walkability associations with active transportation, body mass index, and air quality. J Am Plan Assoc 71(1):75–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funes-Monzote FR, Monzote M, Lantinga EA, Keulen H (2009) Conversion of specialised dairy farming systems into sustainable mixed farming systems in Cuba. Environ Dev Sustain 11(4):765–783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-008-9142-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibarrola-Rivas MJ, Galicia L (2017) Rethinking food security in Mexico: discussing the need for sustainable transversal policies linking food production and food consumption. Investig Geograficas 2017:106–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Isakson SR (2009) No hay ganancia en la milpa: the agrarian question, food sovereignty, and the on-farm conservation of agrobiodiversity in the Guatemalan highlands. J Peasant Stud 36:725–759. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150903353876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen E, Bedoussac L, Carlsson G, Journet EP, Justes E, Hauggaard-Nielsen H (2015) Enhancing yields in organic crop production by eco-functional intensification. Sustain Agri Res 4. https://doi.org/10.5539/sar.v4n3p42

  • Knörzer S Graeff-Hönninger B Guo P Wang W Claupein (2009) The rediscovery of intercrop** in China: a traditional crop** system for future Chinese agriculture – a review

    Google Scholar 

  • Leatherman T, Goodman AH, Stillman JT (2020) A critical biocultural perspective on tourism and the nutrition transition in the Yucatan. In: Azcorra H, Dickinson F (eds) Culture, environment and health in the Yucatan Peninsula. Springer, Cham, pp 97–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27001-8_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez-Ridaura S, Barba-Escoto L, Reyna-Ramirez CA, Sum C, Palacios-Rojas N, Gerard B (2021) Maize intercrop** in the milpa system. Diversity, extent and importance for nutritional security in the Western Highlands of Guatemala. Sci Rep 11(1):3696. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-82784-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lozada-Aranda M, Rojas I, Mastretta A, Ponce-Mendoza A, Burgeff C, Orjuela RA et al (2017) Las milpas en Mexico. Oikos 17:10–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Malthus T (1798) An essay on the principle of population. In: Elwell F (ed) A commentary on Malthus’ 1798 essay on the principle of population as social theory. Mellen Press, Lewiston, pp 127–294, commentary printed 2001

    Google Scholar 

  • Malthus T (1826) An essay on the principle of population. Cambridge University Press, edited by Patricia James [1989]

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann CC (2006) 1491: new revelations of the Americas before Columbus, 1st Vintage Books ed. Vintage, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazoyer M, Roudart L (2006) A history of world agriculture: from the neolithic age to the current crisis. Earthscan Publication Ltd

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalscheck M, Groot JCJ, Kotu B, Hoeschle-Zeledon I, Kuivanen K, Descheemaeker K, Tittonell P (2018) Model results versus farmer realities. Operationalizing diversity within and among smallholder farm systems for a nuanced impact assessment of technology packages. Agric Syst 162:164–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalscheck M, Groot JCJ, Fischer G, Tittonell P (2020) Land use decisions: by whom and to whose benefit? A serious game to uncover dynamics in farm land allocation at household level in Northern Ghana. Land Use Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104325

  • Moraine M (2009) Analyse de l’organisation spatiale à l’échelle de l’exploitation et du territoire : le cas de la région de Kisumu, Kenya. Mémoire de fin d'études Ingénieur de l’enesad en Formation Initiale, Dijon, France, 71 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Novotny IP, Fuentes-Ponce MH, Lopez-Ridaura S, Tittonell P, Rossing WAH (2021a) Longitudinal analysis of household types and livelihood trajectories in Oaxaca, Mexico. J Rural Stud 81:170–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.10.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novotny IP, Tittonell P, Fuentes-Ponce MH, López-Ridaura S, Rossing WAH (2021b) The importance of the traditional milpa in food security and nutritional self-sufficiency in the highlands of Oaxaca, Mexico. PLoS One 16(2):e0246281. https://doi-org.proxy-ub.rug.nl/10.1371/journal.pone.0246281

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ocimati W, Ntamwira J, Groot JCJ, Tittonell P, Ruhigwa B, Blomme G (2019) Banana leaf pruning to facilitate annual legume intercrop** as an intensification strategy in the East African highlands. Eur J Agron 110:125923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palacios Bucheli VJ, Cárcamo Mallen RW, Álvarez Macias A, Coral C, Bokelmann W (2021) Indigenous family labor in agroforestry systems in the context of global transformations: the case of the Inga and Camëntsá communities in Putumayo, Colombia. Forests 12:1503. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12111503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponisio LC, M’Gonigle LK, Mace KC, Palomino J, de Valpine P, Kremen C (2015) Diversification practices reduce organic to conventional yield gap. Proc R Soc B 282:20141396

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam H, Godek W, Kissmann S, Pierre JL, Alvarado Dzul SH, Calix de Dios H et al (2014) Coupling agro- ecology and PAR to identify appropriate food security and sovereignty strategies in indigenous communities. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst 38:165–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2013.837422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qian X, Zang H, Xu H, Hu Y, Ren C, Guo L, Wang C, Zeng Z (2018) Relay strip intercrop** of oat with maize, sunflower and mung bean in semi-arid regions of Northeast China: yield advantages and economic benefits. Field Crop Res 223:33–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2018.04.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ray S, Sood A, Panigrahy S, Parihar J (2005) Derivation of indices using remote sensing data to evaluate crop** systems. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 33:475–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02990732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Righi E (2006) Optimizing hand-weeding labour productivity in maize (Zea mais, L.) production for smallholders in Bukoba District, northwest Tanzania. MSc Thesis Firenze University, Italy, 43 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruben R, Pender J (2004) Rural diversity and heterogeneity in less-favoured areas: the quest for policy targeting. Food Policy 29(4):303–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2004.07.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speelman EN, Groot JCJ, García-Barrios LE, Kok K, van Keulen H, Tittonell PA (2014) From co** to adaptation to economic and institutional change – trajectories of change in land-use management and social organization in a biosphere reserve community, Mexico. Land Use Policy 41:31–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suijkerbuik N (2005) Livelihood strategies; the case of diversification and risk attitudes of smallholders in Central Kenya. MSc Thesis Wageningen Uniersity, The Netherlands, 71 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Tittonell P (2003) Soil fertility gradients in smallholder farms of western Kenya. Their origin, magnitude and importance. In: Quantitative Approaches in Systems Analysis No. 25, ISBN 90-6754-713-1, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 233 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Tittonell (2014) Ecological intensification – sustainable by nature. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 8:53–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tittonell P (2018) Ecological intensification of agriculture, Ch. 13. In: Serraj R, **ali P (eds) Agriculture & Food Systems to 2050. Global trends, challenges and opportunities. World Scientific, pp 437–472. https://doi.org/10.1142/11212

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tittonell P, Vanlauwe B, de Ridder N, Giller KE (2007) Heterogeneity of crop productivity and resource use efficiency within smallholder Kenyan farms: soil fertility gradients or management intensity gradients? Agric Syst 94:376–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tittonell P, Corbeels M, van Wijk MT, Giller KE (2009) FIELD – a summary simulation model of the soil-crop system to analyse long-term resource interactions and use efficiencies at farm scale. Eur J Agron 32:10–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tittonell P, Scopel E, Andrieu N, Posthumus H, Mapfumo P, Corbeels M, van Halsema GE, Lahmar R, Lugandu S, Rakotoarisoa J, Mtambanengwe F, Pound B, Chikowo R, Naudin K, Triomphe B, Mkomwa S (2012) Agroecology-based aggradation-conservation agriculture (ABACO): targeting innovations to combat soil degradation and food insecurity in semi-arid Africa. Field Crop Res 132:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tittonell P, Hara SM, Álvarez VE, Aramayo VM, Bruzzone OA, Easdale MH, Enriquez AS, Laborda L, Trinco FD, Villagra SE, El Mujtar V (2021) Ecosystem services and disservices associated with pastoral systems from Patagonia, Argentina – a review. Cah Agri 30:43. https://doi.org/10.1051/cagri/2021029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Heemst HDJ (1986) Crop calendar, workability and labour requirements. In: Modelling of agricultural production: weather, soils and crops. Wageningen University, pp 251–262, ISBN: 9022008584

    Google Scholar 

  • van Ittersum MK, Rabbinge R (1997) Concepts in production ecology for analysis and quantification of agricultural input-output combinations. Field Crop Res 52:197–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4290(97)00037-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zingore S, Murwira HK, Delve RJ, Giller KE (2007) Soil type, historical management and current resource allocation: three dimensions regulating variability of maize yields and nutrient use efficiencies on African smallholder farms. Field Crop Res 101:296–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Zingore S, Tittonell P, Corbeels M, Wijk MT, Giller KE (2011) Managing soil fertility diversity to enhance resource use efficiencies in smallholder farming systems: a case from Murewa District, Zimbabwe. Nut Cycl Agroecosyst 90:87-103

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Tittonell, P. (2023). Production Functions and Factors in Agroecosystems. In: A Systems Approach to Agroecology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42939-2_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Navigation