Crop–livestock interactions in agricultural and pastoral systems in West Africa

Moritz, Mark

doi:10.1007/s10460-009-9203-z

Cited by 31 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This overlap of action spaces has created some degree of close contact and mutual effect, if not necessarily social cooperation, between the farmers and herders throughout the area. This can sometimes include serious conflicts between farmers and herders, as well as competitive politics over land management (Moritz 2006, Turner 2006, Benjaminsen and Bubacar 2009, Benjaminsen et al 2009, Moritz 2010. Thus, even though their social systems often have limited contact and are relatively separate, the ecological linkages between farmers and herders are substantial, which justifies characterizing them as part of one social-ecological system.…”

Section: History Livelihood Change and Cultural Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Of Models and Meanings: Cultural Resilience in Social–Ecological Systems

Crane¹

2010

E&S

168

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Modeling has emerged as a key technology in analysis of social-ecological systems. However, the tendency for modeling to focus on the mechanistic materiality of biophysical systems obscures the diversity of performative social behaviors and normative cultural positions of actors within the modeled system. The fact that changes in the biophysical system can be culturally constructed in different ways means that the perception and pursuit of adaptive pathways can be highly variable. Furthermore, the adoption of biophysically resilient livelihoods can occur under conditions that are subjectively experienced as the radical transformation of cultural systems. The objectives of this work are to: (1) highlight the importance of understanding the place of culture within social-ecological systems, (2) explore the tensions between empirical and normative positions in the analysis of social-ecological resilience, and (3) suggest how empirical modeling of social-ecological systems can synergistically interact with normative aspects of livelihoods and lifeways.

show abstract

Section: History Livelihood Change and Cultural Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Of Models and Meanings: Cultural Resilience in Social–Ecological Systems

Crane¹

2010

E&S

168

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many authors including (McIntire and Gryseels, 1987;Latham, 1997;Erenstein and Thorpe, 2010;Moritz, 2010) had identified two major uses of crop residues -use as livestock and use as mulch and opined that residue use as livestock feed exerts a competitive pressure on residue use as soil mulch. However, literature is scanty on the drivers of crop residue usage particularly in northern Nigeria.…”

Section: Background Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crop residue usage and its determinants in Kano State, Nigeria

Akinola¹,

Ayedun²,

Abubakar³

et al. 2015

J. Dev. Agric. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined crop residue usage and determined factors influencing the decision to allocate as well as the intensity of crop residue in Kano state, Nigeria. A multi-stage sampling technique was employed to select 160 farming households in three local government areas of the state. Data collected were analyzed with descriptive statistics and double hurdle Tobit model. The results of the study showed that on a general note, crop residues allocated for own animal feeding had the major share. Farmers preferred using crop residue for feeding than mulching. The allocation of the legume residues for feed purposes was about 64 percent; the share for cereal residues of animal feed was 26 percent. Other important competing uses of crop residue of legumes and cereals were also different. These included stall feeding, burning, house construction and fuel. About 17 percent of legumes residues are sold either on field or offsite. Legume residues were major sources for redistributing nutrient within the farm and between farm units (within the systems). More of legume crop residue (CR) was used within the farm/community (88.9 percent) while only 11 percent was exported. The decision to adopt cereal crop residue as livestock feeds was positively and significantly influenced by age, education, access to credit facilities and quantity of cereal crop residue available to the farmers. On the other hand, decision to use legume crop residue was positively and statistically influenced by farm size and access to extension facilities. However, the intensity of use of both categories of residues was mostly determined by age, education and access to credit. Furthermore, results indicated that where both residues were available, farmers complemented the use of one with another. Concerted efforts should therefore be made at increasing awareness and education on the use of crop residues in the crop-livestock system. Similarly, facilitation of extension services in crop residue training and increased access to credit will reduce the degree of residue export from the system.

show abstract

“…The Far North Province of Cameroon has one of the highest population densities in the country and is characterised by a great diversity in ethno-linguistic groups and a mosaic of different agricultural and pastoral systems, which have been integrated at the household, community and regional level for centuries (Moritz 2010;Seignobos and Iyébi-Mandjek 2000). One could describe the grazing lands as fragmented (Galvin et al 2008), but the grazing lands have historically always been part of a mosaic of different forms of land use in the far north region (Seignobos and Iyébi-Mandjek 2000).…”

Section: Mobile Pastoralists In the Far North Province Of Cameroonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rangeland governance in an open system: Protecting transhumance corridors in the Far North Province of Cameroon

Moritz

Catherine

Drent

et al. 2013

Pastor Res Policy Pract

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mobile pastoral system in the far north region of Cameroon is an excellent example of the paradox of pastoral land tenure, in that pastoralists need secure access to pasture and water, but also flexibility in resource use, i.e. the ability to move elsewhere because of spatio-temporal variation in resource availability. In this paper, we draw from our collective research and development experience with mobile pastoralists and discuss how non-governmental organisations have used ordinances and bureaucratic procedures to protect pastoral resources, in particular transhumance corridors that connect seasonal grazing lands in the far north region. We argue that the mobile pastoral system is best understood as an open system and explain what the implications are for the protection of pastoral resources. We argue that delimiting and protecting transhumance corridors is not the panacea, and we conclude with a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of this approach.

show abstract

Crop–livestock interactions in agricultural and pastoral systems in West Africa

Cited by 31 publications

References 23 publications

Of Models and Meanings: Cultural Resilience in Social–Ecological Systems

Of Models and Meanings: Cultural Resilience in Social–Ecological Systems

Crop residue usage and its determinants in Kano State, Nigeria

Rangeland governance in an open system: Protecting transhumance corridors in the Far North Province of Cameroon

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Crop–livestock interactions in agricultural and pastoral systems in West Africa

Cited by 31 publications

References 23 publications

Of Models and Meanings: Cultural Resilience in Social&#8211;Ecological Systems

Of Models and Meanings: Cultural Resilience in Social&#8211;Ecological Systems

Crop residue usage and its determinants in Kano State, Nigeria

Rangeland governance in an open system: Protecting transhumance corridors in the Far North Province of Cameroon

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Of Models and Meanings: Cultural Resilience in Social–Ecological Systems

Of Models and Meanings: Cultural Resilience in Social–Ecological Systems