- Long-term effect of tillage, nitrogen fertilization and cover crops on soil organic carbon and total nitrogen content. No till is better than conservation tillage.
- Catalase is a key enzyme in seed recovery from ageing during priming. It sure is. Good to know.
- Sustainable agriculture: A case study of a small Lopez Island farm. The authors conclude: “the need for future targeted nutrient inputs cannot be ruled out for sustainable long-term production”.
- Evolution of the knowledge system for agricultural development in the Yaqui Valley, Sonora, Mexico. They’re innovative, and diversity promotes agility.
- Changes in phenolic compounds in garlic (Allium sativum L.) owing to the cultivar and location of growth. Don’t hold your breath; only 10 varieties.
- Morpho-physiological and nutritional characterization of rice bean (Vigna umbellata). Now that’s what I call science; 30 varieties.
- Rural livestock asset portfolio in northern Ethiopia: a microeconomic analysis of choice and accumulation. Many, many factors come into play.
- Sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.)-based strip intercropping: I. Interspecific interactions and yield advantage. Almost every intercrop improves yield and bottom line.
- Should payments for biodiversity conservation be based on action or results? A model says: “It depends.”
How to buy on-farm conservation
An item on the website of Conservation Magazine describes how best to buy ecosystem services. It distinguishes “payments for action” from “payments for results”.
Farmers in Europe, it says, are paid to mow their hayfields to create habitat for birds, and get the cash regardless of how many birds use the grasslands. That’s payment for action.
In Cambodia, by contrast, villagers are paid to conserve forests, “but only if visiting birdwatchers see certain unusual species”. Payment for results.
Most current schemes to pay for ecosystem services apparently reward actions, rather than results. But which method actually delivers better results?
In general, “payment by action is favored where there is a clear action” that will clearly benefit biodiversity and is relatively easy to measure, they concluded. So paying to increase wetland habitat for birds known to frequent marshes would make sense.
In contrast, in degraded landscapes, or in places where conservationists aren’t sure which actions will bring the most benefit, it might make more sense to pay for results.
The conclusions emerge not from any kind of field study but from a theoretical model “consisting of one conservation agency, one land manager and one patch of habitat. The model assumed that the land manager wanted to maximize income from the patch. The agency, meanwhile, had a limited budget and wanted to get the biggest biodiversity boost for its buck.”
How to apply this to on-farm conservation of agricultural biodiversity? It’s complex. Research is currently going on at Bioversity and elsewhere, with some nifty approaches that, for example, allow different communities to bid for the payments, establishing a market that economist Adam Drucker says allows you to get more conservation for the same amount of money. He has also been exploring the tensions between economic efficiency and social equity; do members of the community resent some being paid more than others for the “same” conservation. A peer-reviewed journal has accepted a paper for publication; we’ll bring you news of an “easier” version of the story when we have it.
Nibbles: G20, Chickens, Yucca flowers
- Advice to the G20: “hunger is neither the result of demographic problems nor just the result of a mismatch between supply and demand”.
- Let there be chickens! Picture goodness from National Geographic.
- How to cook yucca flowers. And eat them, obviously.
Tomato, black pepper and coffee
No, those aren’t the ingredients for some kind of wacky new dish. But they do offer some insights into the global realpolitik and social status of the food bizniss, past and present.
Thanks to Rachel Laudan for pointing to Lapham’s Quarterly, source of that infographic — you’ll want to click on it to see it bigger and better — and much else besides.
Nibbles: SusAg WWF-style, Obesity, Innovation, African farmers, Cyanobacteria, Climate change experiment
- See what WWF thinks will make agriculture sustainable.
- Americans are dying younger. Obesity partly to blame.
- Study shows how scientists can get farmers to innovate. And vice versa?
- Iron-age beer in France. “Beer … might have resembled modern home brews.” Which might have created a nation of wine-drinkers.
- Voice of America ♥ Nourishing the Planet. (African farmers also important.)
- Bacteria in mosses on tree branches fertilize forest soils. How long before the whole thing is available in a packet?
- Bioengineering the prairie. Together with, presumably, its crop wild relatives.