FUNDAÇÃO GETULIO VARGAS
ESCOLA DE ADMINISTRAÇÃO DE EMPRESAS DE SÃO PAULO
JORGE FEDERICO USECHE CAÑÓN
SUSTAINABLE SILVOPASTORAL SYSTEMS: THEORY AND A PRACTICAL CASE
SÃO PAULO
JORGE FEDERICO USECHE CAÑÓN
SUSTAINABLE SILVOPASTORAL SYSTEMS: THEORY AND A PRACTICAL CASE
Thesis presented to Escola de
Administração de Empresas de São Paulo of Fundação Getulio Vargas, as a requirement to obtain the title of Master in International Management (MPGI).
Knowledge Field: Economia e Finanças Internacionais
Adviser: Prof. Dr. Manoel de Andrade e Silva Reis
SÃO PAULO
Federico Useche Cañón, JORGE
Sustainable Silvopastoral Systems: Theory and a Practical Case / Jorge Federico Useche Cañón. - 2014.
129 f.
Orientador: Reis, Manoel de Andrade e Silva.
Dissertação (MPGI) - Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo.
1. Sistemas silvipastoris. 2. Desenvolvimento sustentável. 3. Produção animal. 4. Meio ambiente. 5. Ecossistemas. I. Reis, Manoel de Andrade e Silva. II. Dissertação (MPGI) - Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo. III. Título.
JORGE FEDERICO USECHE CAÑÓN
SUSTAINABLE SILVOPASTORAL SYSTEMS: THEORY AND A PRACTICAL CASE
Thesis presented to Escola de
Administração de Empresas de São Paulo of Fundação Getulio Vargas, as a requirement to obtain the title of Master in International Management (MPGI).
Knowledge Field: Economia e Finanças Internacionais
Approval Date
____/____/_____
Committee members:
_______________________________
Prof. Dr. Manoel de Andrade e Silva Reis
_______________________________
Prof. Dr.Eliciane Maria da Silva
_______________________________
ABSTRACT
Many changes are expected because of the climate change, especially from the agricultural activities done in the tropics. This thesis focuses on two aspects. The first one is to gather knowledge of environmentally sustainable silvopastoral systems; this view establishes the importance of tropical soils and their proper management in line with environmental and sustainable standards. The second part of the thesis is the application of these principles in a specific case: the “El Paraíso” Farm improvement. The central objective or problem to solve of the thesis is to explain silvopastoril principles; and based on that to propose a project to improve meat production activities and at the same time help to preserve and to improve the environment. The methodology used in the thesis was to search and to analyze information on the subject, after that experimental and field research was conducted to raise the project that would combine the two parts of the work. At the end with the information gathered a project proposal was done. The objective was to propose the transformation of the production processes in the selected farm. After developing and presenting the project, the chances of project implementation were analyzed. The conclusion of the study was to present and discuss three possible scenarios after the implementation, it is discussed and expected that the positive scenario is reached. Finally the general conclusion presents the achievements, the opportunities and possible future expansions of the project.
RESUMO
Muitas transformações são esperadas por causa das mudanças do clima, especialmente das atividades agrícolas realizadas nos trópicos. Esta tese centra-se em dois aspectos. O primeiro deles é o de reunir o conhecimento de sistemas silvipastoris; este ponto de vista estabelece a importância de solos tropicais e sua gestão adequada de acordo com as normas ambientais e sustentáveis. A segunda parte da tese é a aplicação desses princípios em um caso específico: a fazenda "El Paraíso". O objetivo central ou problema a resolver da segunda parte é propor um projeto para melhorar as atividades de produção de carne e, ao mesmo tempo, ajudar a preservar e melhorar o meio ambiente e especialmente os ecossistemas tropicais. A metodologia utilizada na tese foi buscar e analisar informações sobre o assunto. Depois disso, a investigação experimental e de campo foi realizada para levantar o projeto que combinaria as duas partes da obra. No final, com a informação recolhida uma proposta de projeto foi feita. O objetivo era propor a transformação dos processos de produção na fazenda selecionada. Logo de desenvolver e apresentar o projeto, foram analisadas as possibilidades de implementação do projeto. A conclusão do estudo foi o de apresentar e discutir três cenários possíveis após a implementação. Finalmente, a conclusão geral apresenta as realizações, as oportunidades e possíveis expansões futuras do projeto.
LIST OF TABLES.
Table 1 Topography ... 90
Table 2 Trees ... 92
Table 3 First Part Time Table ... 97
Table 4 First Part Costs ... 97
Table 5 Second Part Time Table ... 99
Table 6 Trees inventory ... 99
Table 7 Second Part Table of Costs ... 99
Table 8 Third Part Time Table ... 101
Table 9 Third Part Table of Costs ... 101
Table 10 Fourth Part Time Table ... 104
LIST OF FIGURES.
Figure 1 Meat production growth dominated by developing countries ... 27
Figure 2 Meat Demand ... 29
Figure 3 Rockström Nine Planetary Limits ... 45
Figure 4 Trees helping in dry zones ... 59
LIST OF ANNEXES
ANNEX 1 Map of Sabanalarga ... 118
ANNEX 2 Distance from Bogota ... 118
ANNEX 3 The House of the Farm ... 119
ANNEX 4 The Tractor ... 119
ANNEX 5 El Corral Paddock ... 120
ANNEX 6 Soil Survey ... 121
ANNEX 7 Table of Good Balances ... 122
ANNEX 8 table of recommendations ... 123
ANNEX 9 Topographic Map ... 124
ANNEX 10 Renewer of Grassland ... 125
ANNEX 11 Tree Species ... 126
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
BSE - Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
CORPOICA - Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria
DANE - Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística
ICF - International Climate Fund
IDEAM - Instituto de Hidrología, Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales de Colombia
IGAC - Instituto Geográfico Agustín Codazzi
FAO – Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations FEDEGAN - Federación Colombiana de Ganaderos
GHG - Greenhouse Gases
OECD - The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
ABSTRACT ... 6
RESUMO ... 7
LIST OF TABLES. ... 8
LIST OF FIGURES. ... 9
LIST OF ANNEXES ... 10
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ... 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS. ... 12
1. Introduction ... 17
1.1. Problems ... 18
1.2. Research Question ... 18
1.3. Objective ... 19
1.4. Specific Objectives ... 19
2. Justification ... 21
3. Literature Overview ... 24
3.1. Situation of the Cattle Industry. ... 24
3.2. Worldwide situation ... 26
3.2.1. Production ... 26
3.2.2. Demand ... 28
3.2.3. Exports ... 31
3.2.4. Risks and Regulation in Livestock Supply Chains. ... 33
3.3. In Colombia ... 37
3.3.1 Production ... 37
3.3.2. Demand ... 39
3.3.3. Exports ... 40
3.5. The Selection of the Silvopastoril System ... 46
3.6. Biodiversity Conservation and environment benefit ... 46
3.7. Sustainable Livestock Farming ... 48
3.8. Greenhouse Gases and Animal Husbandry. ... 51
3.9. Tropical Soils ... 52
3.10. Agroecological Soil Management in Tropical Livestock Farming. ... 55
3.11. Trees as moderators of the water cycles. ... 58
3.12. Organic matter and Humus ... 61
3.13. Plant diversity in tropical pastures for sustainable production. ... 62
3.14. The tropical pasture ecosystem. ... 65
3.15. Maintaining pasture and forage crops ... 67
3.16. Degradation and rehabilitation of tropical pastures ... 68
4. “El Paraíso” Farm Improvement Case Study ... 71
4.1. Selection of the Farm ... 71
4.2. Methodology ... 71
4.3. Research Design ... 71
4.4. Methodology Schedule ... 72
4.5. Context ... 72
4.6. General Features of the Farm ... 73
4.7. The Company’s Products and Services ... 73
4.8. Mission ... 73
4.9. Vision ... 74
4.10. The Company’s Values ... 74
4.11. The Company’s Strengths ... 74
4.12. History 1960-2014 ... 74
4.12.1. Livestock in the Department of Casanare ... 74
4.12.3. The Purchase of “El Paraíso” Farm ... 75
4.12.4. The Purchase of Adjacent properties ... 75
4.12.5. Rodeos (Cattle droving) from Barley. ... 76
4.12.6. Without Access ... 76
4.12.7. Expansion 1970 / Highway ... 77
4.12.8. Gileños and Trucks ... 77
4.12.9. Consolidation and Construction of the Dual Carriageway 2010 ... 77
4.13. Management. ... 78
4.14. Strategy ... 79
4.15. Supply Chain ... 80
4.15.1. Breeders ... 80
4.15.2. Transporters ... 81
4.15.3. Cattle Brokers ... 81
4.15.4. Cattle Buyers ... 81
4.15.5. Slaughterhouses ... 81
4.15.6. Structure of productive activity ... 82
4.16. Competition ... 83
4.17. Community and social responsibility ... 83
5. Agroecological Study ... 85
5.1. Location ... 85
5.2. Geography ... 85
5.3. Climate ... 85
5.4. Vegetation / Biodiversity ... 86
5.5. Actual Infraestructure ... 86
5.6. Work force ... 87
5.7. Animals, class and load. ... 87
5.9. Potential fertility ... 89
5.10. Topography ... 90
6. Definition of the Problems and Project ... 91
6.1. General diagnosis ... 91
6.2. Identifying Problems ... 91
6.2.1. Low productivity ... 91
6.2.2. Soil degradation and erosion ... 91
6.2.3. Deforestation ... 92
6.2.4. Indirect Effects ... 93
6.3. Research Question ... 93
6.4. Objective ... 93
6.5. Specific Objectives ... 93
6.6. Parameters ... 94
6.7. Defining or formulating solutions ... 94
6.8. Opportunities ... 94
6.9. The project main features ... 95
6.10. Organization of the project ... 95
6.11. Implements and labor. ... 96
6.12. Activities. ... 96
6.12.1. First Part ... 96
6.12.1.1. Timetable ... 97
6.12.1.2. Table of Costs ... 97
6.12.2. Second Part ... 98
6.12.2.1. Time Table ... 99
6.12.2.2. Table of Costs ... 99
6.12.3. Third Part ... 101
6.12.3.2. Table of Costs ... 101
6.12.4. Fourth Part ... 102
6.12.4.1. Short-term goals (1 to 2 years) ... 102
6.12.4.1.1. Cattle per hectare ... 102
6.12.4.1.2. Number of trees per hectare ... 103
6.12.4.2. Long-term goals (3 to 4 years) ... 103
6.12.4.2.1. Cattle per hectare ... 103
6.12.4.2.2. Number of trees per hectare ... 103
6.12.5. Total Time Table ... 104
6.12.6. Total Table of Costs ... 104
7. Possible Scenarios and Conclusions ... 105
7.1. Initial Assumptions ... 105
7.2. Negative ... 105
7.3. Intermediate ... 107
7.4. Positive ... 108
7.5. Discussion ... 109
7.6. Risks ... 110
7.7. Limitations ... 110
7.8. Expansion to other realities ... 111
7.9. General Conclusions ... 111
LIST OF REFERENCES ... 113
1. Introduction
Silvopastoral systems are a intended to reconcile tropical livestock activities with the environment, especially the increasing need to conserve, maintain and improve tropical ecosystems. For this purpose, different experiments have been conducted in different countries which both have sought and proven that it is possible to generate better productivity and less impact on the environment, and even work toward improving it. The forms of silvopastoral production improve ecosystems and conserve sensitive environments in the tropics. After much research, silvopastoral systems have proven to be a viable system that generates benefits for producers and the environment.
The first part of the thesis, which is theoretical, is also divided into two sections. Firstly, there is a thorough analysis of the situation of meat production worldwide, with special attention given to the specific situation in the Republic of Colombia. These analyses study the various risks and opportunities that exist within the meat industry as well as future possibilities. The second section of this section explains silvopastoral systems, i.e. sustainable agricultural management and how to improve the context and ecosystem of meat production. Special emphasis is placed on the effects, management and administration of soils dedicated to the production of meat. Additionally, it is shown how it is possible to produce meat in tropical ecosystems that stimulate the improvement as much of soil quality and organic matter as of balance sheets. Finally, this section concludes with the importance of improving degraded soils and how they can be repaired to improve productivity. All the analysis contained in this first part is relevant for the second part which contains the project that actually applies the principles that are contained and explained in this first part.
choice, presentation and analysis of the “El Paraíso” Farm, the object of study of this project. It contains an analysis of the administrative and managerial aspects of the farm, as well as its mission, vision, values and history. Additionally, there is a geographical and topographical description of the property; this description includes a study of soils, topography and all the elements that enable the characterization and identification of the same to define and give a specific idea of the Farm itself and outline the problems that need to be resolved. The second section is the structuring and presentation of the project. The first part contains a description of the methodology to be used, the research design and the Farm’s current problems. Based on the forgoing, we raise the questions and objectives to be dealt with in this thesis. It is important to show certain items in this introduction, such as the problems, the research question and objectives. They are explained below:
1.1. Problems
The problems identified are as follows. The first, low productivity, the ability to sustain bulls per hectare has decreased significantly. The second, Soil degradation and erosion, the loss of soil characteristics (texture, nutrients and minerals). The third is Deforestation, which indicates a growing loss of trees and the negative effects produced by the same. The final problem is that of Indirect Effects which are related gas emissions and water pollution among others and transect all of the above.
1.2. Research Question
1.3. Objective
The central idea of this thesis is to propose a project to recover the Farm’s
productivity and soil fertility. Central to this are two special goals. Firstly, the Farm’s
beef production needs to be increased. Secondly, the Farm must implement higher standards of environmental conservation (soil quality and density of trees). In conclusion, this thesis seeks to make a complete proposal of a silvopastoral system in order to improve the Farm’s productivity and sustainability.
1.4. Specific Objectives
The specific objectives are raised in the Project’s three objectives, which include:
How to increase the sustainability of animals per hectare (cattle per hectare); How to improve increase soil fertility and pastures (Indicators of fertility);
How to increase plantings within the farm (number of trees per paddock / or throughout the farm).
The project was designed to be implemented in a four-year period starting in March 2015. The overall project objectives are: On the one hand, the improvement of the farm’s productivity and, especially, its load capacity (animals / ha) while improving sustainability issues and the relationship between the environment and the productive activity itself. Specific actions are aligned with specific objectives. The first action is to improve the quality of the Farm’s pastures applying principles of biodiversity and sustainability. The second action is to fertilize and improve the soil with nutrients and fertilizers and, generally, improve soil structure. Finally, the last action includes planting trees, increasing the percentage of trees on the Farm. The
ultimate goal is the consolidation of silvopastoral pastures to improve the Farm’s
At the end of the thesis, there are descriptions of three possible scenarios and general conclusions. The scenarios are: negative, intermediate and positive. They describe specific situations and deliverables that will depend on the implementation and project management in reality. Finally, there is a general conclusion which includes possible applications in different agricultural areas and the effects on the environment which can be expected or anticipated.
2. Justification
There are two main justifications for writing this thesis; one is economic in character while the other is environmental. Taken together they imply the incursion and application of silvopastoral systems.
The economic reasons are based on the fact that all productive activity seeks to generate added value, while being efficient and productive, thus generating more efficient supply chains that are also more environmentally friendly. Additionally, market and social values continue to require that production activities demonstrate an ever-increasing commitment to the environment. Production activities that internalize environmental conservation and improvement will be more competitive and have advantages over others, which may even help them implement and coordinate standards with regulatory and supervisory bodies.
Until now, agricultural activities have used resources that have hidden prices or values and whose use generates externalities. The resources used that are most affected by meat production are soil, water and the actual biodiversity present in these ecosystems. Great problems are caused in soils in tropical bush and forest areas that have been transformed by agricultural activities. Soil erosion, decreasing biodiversity, and high water use by livestock have generated large environmental costs that simply are not taken into account in meat prices. These changes and uses should be compensated and recovered within livestock supply chain processes. The recognition of that will generate value for the consumers and the society.
Paraíso” Farm, it is a farm with a reduced load capacity. Therefore, an important justification is to increase its load capacity and, hence, improve productivity. As with any productive activity, production must be improved in accordance with market conditions and needs.
Environmental considerations are fundamental as this is an agricultural activity that has a strong impact on natural resources. Therefore, the supply chain should seek to be as sustainable as possible and even improve the conditions of the natural resources used. This can be justified due to the warnings made by the expert panel on climate change who, on several occasions, have issued clear warnings concerning the need to improve agricultural activities and, thus, reduce their effects on global warming.
There is a moral commitment to preserve the environment, not only for humanity, but also for other species as well as for future generations. In the case of livestock production, several risks have been identified in the literature as representing serious threats to environment and to production. The most relevant issues are: climate change, the actual resources used for the production of meat (which specifically refer to: soil erosion, water use, emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), decreasing biodiversity, as well as the deforestation of rainforest areas), and bovine diseases that can affect human health.
activities for global warming and, therefore, many argue in favor of reducing meat consumption. What is becoming clear is that it is possible to both produce meat more efficiently and help reduce harm in the environment. Thus, the meat industry must aim to enhance production efficiency while acting to prevent the expansion of production into new areas.
3. Literature Overview
3.1. Situation of the Cattle Industry.
The cattle industry is the business activity dedicated to the production of beef for human consumption. It is an activity that has several phases and includes various logistical processes. The main participants or, in other words, the specialized units of the chain are the primary producers or farmers, traders, packers, and distributors. Each member of this chain has specific functions and adds a specific value to the meat production chain. Below is a concise description of these activities.
As this thesis will focus on the primary activity of livestock fattening, a more detailed definition of livestock will be given; according to Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria [CORPOICA] (2009) within the chain cattle-ranchers are:
Farmers, whose business is the production of animals, make up the link of the primary producers in the beef production chain. This activity is performed in production units called farms (livestock enterprises) where a number of physical and human resources are used; these resources include: land, cattle, agricultural inputs, veterinary drugs, infrastructure for the handling and care of animals, as well as labor and other multiple services that facilitate production.
This is a comprehensive definition that includes all primary activities required for meat production or other bovine products in the sector. As has been stated previously, within this sector there are three separate distinctions. The object of interest in this thesis will be a farm that is specialized in feedlot activities. At this farm, cattle are purchased from producers, cattle-raisers or traders in order to fatten them during an established period for the final processes. In other words, it is a farm dedicated to preparing cattle before they are brought to the meat packing plant.
3.2. Worldwide situation
3.2.1. Production
In recent years, livestock production worldwide has been stable, which does not mean that it has not been subject to pressures of resource availability and price variability. What is clear to the OECD (2011) is that world production (and demand) of meat is being led by developing countries. Additionally, even though this demand is stable, it has a significant effect on the increase of the use of resources such as soil and water. It is important to conclude that it is expected that all production activity will enhance the relevant supply chain and generate ever greater efficiencies. In general, it is expected that the use of resources, in addition to better communication and coordination between the different actors in the chain will improve their efficiency.
For the USDA (2014), world meat production for 2013 was 58.6 million tons of meat. The most important actors in world production by volume are the United States, Brazil, India, China, Argentina, European Union, Australia, Mexico, Pakistan, Russia and Canada. The OECD expects growth in global production to be 1.8% for the period 2010 – 2020. Production growth will be notable in developing countries. It must be remarked upon that in the literature, some countries (India and Mexico) have made great efforts to improve efficiency and productivity in recent years. For the USDA, it is clear that production has been affected by climate change and that this will remain a constant. Therefore, production and supply chains should focus heavily on improving efficiency and the effective use of resources, which necessarily implies improving coordination.
represent the largest increases. This can be explained by facilities to expand production as well as by more efficient use of resources.
Figure 1 Meat production growth dominated by developing countries
Source: Production increase between 2020 and the base period 2008-10 OECD-FAO Agricultural
Outlook 2011 - © OECD 2011
For the OECD (2011) Food prices will continue to rise and demonstrate high volatility. This phenomenon is expected up to 2020, and, furthermore, has been happening since the previous decade. Additionally, other prices directly affect food prices and meat prices. On the one hand, grain prices will carry on increasing, while on the other, there will be further increases in oil prices. These two basic inputs for meat production contribute to the fluctuations in meat prices and will lead to further instability. The projection of the OECD (2011) is that meat prices will raise by 30% in the period between 2010 and 2020.
grain-feeding in confinement, both forms exert strong pressure on environmental resources and biodiversity.
For Smil (2002, 614), the use of crops for animal feed means a loss of energy and proteins that could be directly used by humans. Crops for human use will always have more digestible energy and protein, however, meat protein is of better quality. What is clear is that animal metabolism produces inefficiencies that lead to loss. For the same author (ibid, 617), an example of inefficiency and waste of energy and protein in animal-based protein is that between 80 and 96% of the protein in cereals and legumes consumed by animals is not converted into protein by them.
Given the above, the Livestock industry has been facing ever bigger competitors or products that have begun to replace its products. These competitors include other livestock products (e.g. chicken and pork), but also products that previously were not considered competitive and are alternative sources of protein. This group includes strong tendencies towards vegetable proteins found in legumes. But in addition, there is the new tendency to seek the production of proteins in insects; in fact, there are several projects aimed at the sustainable large-scale consumption of insects.
3.2.2. Demand
For the USDA (2014), world meat consumption in 2013 was 56.8 million tons of meat. The most important consumers are the same producers like the United States, Brazil, India, China, Argentina, European Union, Australia, Mexico, Pakistan, Russia and Canada. Additionally there are some reference consumers, as they represent either strong demand either due to the volume or value of imports, which are: Venezuela, Angola, Chile, Saudi Arabia, Japan and Korea. Increased consumption of small countries will encourage the production of meat, especially in countries such as Brazil and India.
As shown in the OECD graph, 74% of consumption will be led by Asia and Latin America. This implies an increase of 44 million tons in consumption and will involve huge challenges in the production and logistics chains (60 million tons worldwide). In particular, it should be ensured that these chains meet international standards and are competitive due to increasing globalization. Additionally, minimizing the environmental consequences should also be sought due to the pressures which the production and supply chains are already subjected to.
Figure 2 Meat Demand
Source: Increase in meat demand, by region between 2020 and the base period, Consumption growth
Meat consumption is important in human diets because of its high quality protein. For Smil (2002, 614), in rich countries meat supplies 10% of all the energy from food in terms of macronutrients and over 25% of all proteins; while, in poor countries, the ratio is respectively 6% and 13%. Within the literature, meat consumption of less than 10 kilograms per year is considered to be insufficient and cause undernourishment and malnutrition. A balanced intake of meat of around 50 kilograms per year is considered to be desirable according to various authors, in both human and environmental terms.
For the FAO, human consumption of meat (including chicken and pork) is asymmetrical between rich and poor countries. Rich countries consume about 80 kilograms a year, whereas consumption in poor countries reaches only 30 kilograms per year. When only beef consumption is considered, the ratio varies and, in this case, depends on the country's production and consumption preferences. In this regard, the country with the highest consumption of beef is Argentina, with a consumption of 65 kg per year, which is followed by the United States of America, with a consumption of 43 kg per year, and subsequently by Brazil, with a consumption of 38 kilograms per year, all of which are followed by large producers such as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Consumption in Colombia is around 18 kg per year. As may be seen, consumption varies greatly and changes are expected in the future, as well as regulations to encourage better use and consumption (CORPOICA 2009, 28).
issues. Therefore, all efforts to meet the demand for meat and its products must address social and environmental concerns.
Another factor to consider is that related to the quality of meat and production standards that consumers have begun to demand. This element will be reflected in brands and the certification processes requested by consumers. For Loureiro and Umberger (2003), the labeling of the country of origin shows and verifies quality both in terms of the production as well as in the actual meat products will be essential to ensure that consumers are willing to pay a premium on the price of products. The above demonstrates that product quality has gained weight in the consumer market and will continue to do so in the future.
To conclude, Smil (2002, p. 632) argues that the challenge for poor countries is not to increase production but rather to obtain the growth of consumption in order to achieve a balanced diet with different foods. This has two faces, one of which is an increase in responsible consumption with consumers who are much more aware of their impact on the environment, while, on the other hand, balanced diets improve the quality of people’s lives. Consumption marks the way forward for livestock production and is likely to require more quality, efficiency, and respect for the environment.
3.2.3. Exports
The example of the last decade shows that exports were restricted considerably by political and phytosanitary considerations. Ames (2001) shows that meat has been an example that has generated distrust in the European regulatory system as it has been used in an unbalanced way without scientific arguments and, thus, has affected producers from several countries. For instance, imports of American beef have been restricted in tandem with the imposition of trade difficulties due, in part, to phytosanitary restrictions that have gone beyond the restrictions established by the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Likewise, for Ferrara (2010), in 2003, the most affected exports originated in the United States. This is due to phytosanitary restrictions and policies, especially due to BSE, or Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, which generated a massive change in the global dynamics of meat exports. The most competitive markets for producers were precisely those which were lost by the United States: Japan, Korea, Russia and China. These markets are valuable both for their volume and for the value of exports to them; in the future, they will become a source of constant friction and disputes.
In any case, international trade will continue moving large quantities of meat and money in quantities that are significant for the global economy. Exports continue to be important, but will probably remain at 12% to 16% of production of the major producing countries (USDA, 2014). Domestic markets remain important and critical for the production of meat. Clearly, trade in animal products will decrease as a result of preventive measures and health, not to mention that they will be affected by political considerations that affect trade. The considerations are very random as phytosanitary and diseases are major obstacles for exports, as can be seen from the example of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, BSE, that has profoundly change the world meat trade in recent decades.
The trend towards globalization and the increase of free trade agreements such as Mercosur, European Union, and multiple FTAs all represent opportunities and challenges for different supply chains of beef, at both domestic and international levels. A positive effect of economic globalization that has been tested is the ability to compare and compete with these markets. Donovan J., Caswell J and E. Salay (2001) note that corporations in developing countries that adopt stronger and stricter standards for exports end up benefiting their own domestic consumers as these standards are also applied to the domestic market, all of which lead to better standards for domestic consumers. World trade is important and will remain so, and can be considered as an acid test for supply chains. Trade helps to improve the efficiency and coordination of these chains.
3.2.4. Risks and Regulation in Livestock Supply Chains.
generations. Additionally, market and social values continue to require that production activities demonstrate an ever increasing commitment to the environment. Production activities that internalize environmental conservation and improvement will be more competitive and have advantages over others, which may even help them implement and coordinate standards with the above mentioned regulatory and supervisory bodies. (Gerber et al, 2013)
In the case of livestock production, several risks have been identified in the literature as representing serious threats to production in the future. These will be described below as the analysis of the same is the primary objective of this thesis. The most relevant issues are: climate change, the actual resources used for the production of meat (which specifically refer to: soil erosion, water use, emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), decreasing biodiversity, as well as the deforestation of rainforest areas), and bovine diseases that can affect human health (e.g. BSE or Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy) not to mention input prices. (Gerber et al, 2013)
Climate change is an imminent threat that has been identified by many scientific bodies. Murgueitio (2005) have shown that grazing systems are totally dependent on their ecological environments and resources. Therefore, it is clear that large changes in these contexts will have great impact on the productivity and efficiency of livestock production, especially in regard to the availability of food and the decrease in water for the animals that produce meat. Scientific reports indicate that tropical countries will be those most affected by climate change. Periods of rain and drought will develop demonstrably greater variability and uncertainty, all of which generally will affect agricultural activities tremendously.
transformed by agricultural activities. Soil erosion, decreasing biodiversity and high water use in livestock have generated large environmental costs that are simply not taken into account in meat prices. These changes should be compensated and recovered within livestock supply chain processes.
For Smil (2002, 620) the effects of pasture-feeding livestock in poor countries are soil erosion, degradation and inappropriate management of pastures. In rich countries, where meat is produced through large tracts of land required for growing cereals, which also are subject to large-scale applications of fertilizers and pesticides, the erosion thusly produced is due to the cultivation of grain and soybeans. In 2002, 700 million tons of cereals and pulses and which contained enough energy to feel over 3 billion people, or, in other words, a third of global crop production was dedicated to meat production.
Water use has raised serious questions about the activity and has set off environmental alarms. For Smil (2002, 620,) the effects of meat production on the water are very intense in their use. An example of this is that chickens consume a third (1/3) less water than pigs per unit of protein, and less than one tenth (1/10) than cattle per unit of protein. If the necessary and indirect water present in the soil for the actual production of grass or grain is considered, the production per protein unit of beef implies 1,000 times its mass in water. It is evident then that the international meat trade can be considered more an exchange of water between nations with little water and those with plenty.
Smil (2014), the price of meat should rise to reflect the environmental costs implied in its production and, thus, should represent total costs.
In 2013 the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) estimated that CO2 emissions by livestock farming were equivalent to 7.1 giga tones, this represents 14.5% of human emissions. Of these emissions, 41% of emissions are the product of meat production activities. Some studies argue that it is one of the most harmful activities to global warming and, therefore, many argue in favor of reducing meat consumption. What is becoming clear is that it is possible to both produce meat more efficiently and help reduce global warming, which represents a win-win for everyone and, especially, for the supply chains of livestock.
Bovine diseases are a serious threat to human health and, likewise, they are a barrier to international trade. The example used by Ferrara (2010) of BSE clearly demonstrates the risks to human health presented by these epidemics, even cases such as avian flu are a threat. They show that the risks of large-scale meat production can have huge effects on supply chains and may randomly affect supply chains and human life at any moment.
3.3. In Colombia
3.3.1 Production
For Colombia, livestock activity is an important economic activity in the agricultural sector. According to the International Climate Fund [ICF] (2013), this sector accounts for 38% of the land dedicated to agricultural activities. It also is responsible for 38% of the country’s carbon emissions. It is important to clarify for the purposes of this thesis that 19.9% of the herd is presently being fattened. Federación Colombiana de Ganaderos [FEDEGAN] (2007) states that livestock contributed 6% to the GDP. It is important both as an activity in and of itself, as well as for its rural nature; it also represents 27% of the agricultural GDP, generating 25% of rural employment and is the most important activity in the livestock sector.
Just like Brazil, Colombia is a country that is intimately linked to its rural and agricultural sector. Brazil is a country rich in water and with soils of few nutrients, just like Colombia; and research has been directed to make the rural sector more productive and to take advantage of its large expanses. Colombia could do the same. According to Bell and Kindred (2011), Brazil has used its research and extension to become a major exporter of food and is the only tropical country to do so. Just as Brazil, Colombia may play a central role in producing food. Many countries could learn from the Brazilian experience.
disputes with Venezuela. (CORPOICA, 2009) Troubled relations with the neighboring country and its market over the past decade, together with the economic crisis of 1998 have deeply affected the Colombian economy.
The meat production chain depends on the shape of the country. For Bell and Ross (2008), the United States has a segmented chain in all its parts. However, the slaughter of cattle in that country is highly concentrated, with 70% taking place due to the 4 largest companies (Tyson Foods, Cargill Meat Solutions, JBS Swift and Co. and National Beef Packing). CORPOICA (2009) states that in Brazil, the 6 largest companies have a processing capacity of over one million head per year; representing 27% of the yearly slaughter, these large companies seek to end or terminate the animals prior to slaughter. Brazil tends towards having a high concentration but it is much weaker than in the United States of America.
In comparison, in Colombia, (FEDEGAN, 2007) states that the whole process is characterized as being dispersed and isolated with much greater intermediation. There is a large concentration of slaughterhouses, and usually each town has its own one; although there have been efforts to create regional slaughterhouses in order to take advantages of economies of scale. However, these processes have been slow and unsuccessful. Producers have little communication among themselves; it could even be stated that production in the country is even more dispersed than in the United States or Brazil.
Livestock farming is important for the production of protein for human consumption. However, it also represents major sustainability risks during production. For Ruiz Soto (2012), the idea is to turn Colombia into a world example in sustainable meat production. For over 15 years, case studies and examples have been undertaken to demonstrate that it is possible to carry out productive livestock farming that also has positive effects on the environment and biodiversity. Already, several experiments have been successful and Colombia is now considered as a world leader in the matter. This experiment should be exploited in the future for better and more productive livestock and for the conservation of ecosystems.
3.3.2. Demand
The demand for meat in Colombia reflects the country’s preferences and circumstances. Internationally, Colombia could be considered to be a medium demand market. Consumption in the country is passive and further segmentation is produced due to purchasing power. CORPOICA (2009) states that 85% of the demand for meat is the result of household demand. In 2009, the consumption of boneless meat came close to 600,000 tons a year of which 74.4% are consumed in municipal centers while department capitals consume 42%. Demand is tied to consumer preferences in cities and is linked to the capacity to acquire meat at affordable prices that fit consumers’ diverse budgets.
In the short-term, the biggest increase in demand will result from the increase in consumers’ income. It is expected that in the medium-term, the most competitive products in price will be those with greater increases in consumption, considering the direct relationship between price and performance. Therefore, these products will expressly compete with direct substitutes such as chicken and pork products, and, therefore, gain market share. (CORPOICA, 2009)
What is clear is that the industry will follow global trends and develop products that are of superior quality and added value. Meat products that promote grass-fed beef will be developed and promoted for both domestic consumption and the international market. Following international trends, strategies for promoting the consumption of meat, which is of demonstrably outstanding quality due to stamps and good standards, will be adopted. This involves incorporating technical quality standards to enhance meat consumption. (Loureiro and Umberger, 2003) It is hoped that this is a mutual process implemented between supply and demand to ensure that demand can bring about processes for the modernization of the sector, as well as to update it. (CORPOICA, 2009)
One of the intentions of the livestock industry is to modernize it and improve the quality of demand. However, it is clear for Smil (2002, p. 614) that the increase in global demand will occur due to increasing income. This increase will result in 1 billion people who have average incomes and 4 billion people who have low incomes that, together, will increase the demand for meat. This implies substantial increases in food crops. It also implies that increased demand will be for the most standardized meats without major developments but with competitive prices that are adjusted to consumers’ incomes.
Beef exports in Colombia have historically not been voluminous due to herd size and transportation difficulties. Exports have focused on neighboring markets, especially Venezuela, which is logical, especially considering their geographical proximity. This model has been changing due to free trade agreements, and significant efforts have been made to gain access to markets such as Israel, Russia, Middle Eastern countries, or even Peru. There are also cases where exports were restricted by the European Union due to phytosanitary considerations. In the future, exports are expected to grow as will the amount of cattle, as exports will benefit from the free trade agreements that Colombia has executed.
For CORPOICA (2009) meat imports in Colombia have, likewise, not been voluminous historically, and have remained protected through tariffs. The model in the past, changed in this era of free trade agreements, was to maintain high import tariffs, which were around 80%. It is expected that likewise certain imports will increase by 2019 when several treaties begin to take effect regarding meat. There is some reservation with regard to Mercosur countries due to their ability to produce meat as these are competitive and can introduce large amounts of meat in the country.
3.4. Economics and Sutainability
This new century has been characterized by environmental pressures and the conservation of ecosystems. Therefore, everyday economic activities will be subjected to greater pressures to become more sustainable and generate less environmental impact. This necessarily implies improving our relationship with the environment, which is especially important with regard to farming activities. Production processes should benefit the environment and human beings. All this must be achieved quickly as the effects of climate change are getting stronger every day, directly affecting both people and ecosystems. In conclusion, climate change must be confronted while simultaneously creating value and higher productivity.
For Nidumolu, Prahalad and Rangaswami (2009), the concept of sustainability is transforming the way we produce. Products, technologies, processes and business models will change to adapt to take place within the point of view of sustainable values and improve the environment. This is a profound paradigm shift for productive activities and supply chains. But it appears to be the only possible way. In addition, production activities that become environmentally-friendly will become increasingly more competitive and this will be reflected in their cost structure and profitability.
Whereas for Hart and Milstein (2003), for a business to be sustainable must have social, economic and environmental benefits, i.e. it must respect the line of the three bases (People, Profit, Planet). This is only possible when companies have developed the skills, not only to implement these activities, but, above all, to give continuity within organizations. The application of these new criteria in the future will reduce problematic waste for the environment and also reduce direct costs.
learned and implemented. For Perez-Aleman and Sandilands (2008), the new processes contained within production chains are still defining and correcting applicable standards. The creation of these new standards of working in the field through trials and errors within supply chains and with different actors. This will generate standards which are approved and agreed upon by many of the participants within these same chains. The result is that these new standards will be used and will become effective if a focus on the processes that generate incentives and active assistance of various stakeholders is consolidated.
The challenge of new supply chains is that these sustainability standards should be connected quickly to the realities of production and that their implementation be undertaken by the actors themselves and made their own and thus become desirable for production activities. This latter implantation by actors is particularly important as
it represents continuity over time, and that it does not remain as mere ‘green
washing’ or otherwise ‘washing’ corporate images. What is desirable for Yvon Chouinard, et al, (2011) is that industries enter into a process for the consolidation of standards and indices to improve value chains. These processes generate knock-on or general effects to help improve the relationship with the environment and the planet jointly. In other words, so that new production methods not only avoid damage to the environment but also enhance the environment. (Murgueitio, 2005)
Therefore, management that innovates with regard to environmental issues must be at the cutting edge of process and skills required for implementation. Such risks and leadership, in the long run, will not only generate benefits for businesses, but also define future standards and they will be able to work with regulators in defining standards and procedures. Improvements in supply chains and production activities will lead to improvements both in the quality of life of people and the sustainability of the planet. (Perez-Aleman and Sandilands, 2008)
The ultimate goal of such implementations is to create a supply chain that has the lowest possible price and also produces the least harm to the environment. (Nidumolu, Prahalad and Rangaswami, 2009) For this, it will be necessary for companies to have the information, the vision and determination to implement this goal. Perhaps most importantly, companies must have the vision and determination to make the necessary changes both quickly and effectively so that these changes can bring about the maximization of the two factors: lower costs and the reduction of environmental damage. Much creativity is needed to achieve the two purposes simultaneously.
In the case of agricultural products which are directly related to environmental protection and improvement, for many authors it is clear that for meat production and supply chain sustainability, improvements will come from better management of pastures and this will lead to an increase in production from land already in production. This will be accompanied by more efficient methods in the production and management of agricultural production. (FEDEGAN, 2007)
ocean acidification; global freshwater use; change in land use; chemical pollution; and aerosol dispensers.
Figure 3 Rockström Nine Planetary Limits
Source: Rockström indices of nine planetary limits, Rockström et al (2009)
It can be seen from the graph that the two most affected lines are the effects on biodiversity and the impact on nitrogen cycles. Therefore, supply chains should focus heavily on the performance of these indexes and achieve a better balance between them. (Rockström et al, 2009)
pollution. The improvement of these indices is a solution that is beneficial to the three bases set at the beginning of this chapter. In this way, these indicators will be a tool in the development of this thesis on the supply chain of livestock. (Rockström et al, 2009)
3.5. The Selection of the Silvopastoril System
The silvopastoral system was selected because it is the ideal system for the tropics, which has been made very clear in the literature. This system improves tropical ecosystems and increases livestock productivity. Additionally, it improves the soil characteristics and nutrients while slowly providing better food for livestock. Another feature is that it utilizes a comparative advantage in the tropics that is the large amount of solar radiation that can be used to increase soil protein productivity. Finally, cattle in the tropics need to graze outdoors with better quality grazing which is facilitated by the silvopastoral system, as it is the best for actual animal productivity.
3.6. Biodiversity Conservation and environment benefit
In this regard, in 1992, the Rio Summit recognized the need to reconcile the conservation of biodiversity with human progress. Progress and economic production should be made in terms of sustainability. Livestock production should be included within these principles so that they are consistent with nature and to improve the quality of life of people without jeopardizing the rights of future generations. Preservation of the environment becomes critical for livestock as its continuity in the future depends on acting simultaneously and in accordance with natural cycles.
Rockström is also developed by the literature specialized in livestock. Literature to date has identified between 3 or 5 major problems; however, despite there being no consensus, it is clear that action must be taken quickly to prevent damage and enhance production ecosystems.
Gerber (2013) suggests that the present meat production model generates three major problems. The first problem is that the production of animal protein is much less efficient than that of vegetable protein. The second problem is that livestock contributes to deforestation in areas that are highly sensitive in terms of biodiversity. While the third problem is that meat production is concentrated in areas where land and waste management are inadequate. It could be thusly concluded that the challenges facing the livestock are important and that the new management must advocate for a more efficient and friendly livestock environment.
For Smil (2002, p. 614), the problems identified by Gerber are the same, but he also adds two others which he considers cannot be ignored or forgotten with regard to the production of meat. The first one is that monocultures profoundly affect soil erosion and that this is producing interventions in the water, nitrogen, and carbon cycles. The second problem is that the strong emission of greenhouse gases is affecting our ecosystem. Additionally, he questions the fact that animals are being exposed to stress during production processes. These issues are important in production and even if they cannot be solved together as a whole, if they can be mitigated and their effects so reduced that farm productivity improves, environmental conditions will be alleviated. (Smil, 2002)
supply chain. Support is being provided for the implementation of agroforestry systems that enhance productivity and sustainability. (Ruíz Soto, 2012)
To conclude, Smil (2002, p. 632) argues that one way to decrease the effects of meat production is to reduce the quantity of cereals and leguminous crops in cattle feed. Rich countries can do much for the environment due to the harmful effect of their high consumption of meat; a corresponding reduction of meat consumption to less than 50 kilos per capita is a reasonable measure that would be useful to society, which would also, thusly, reduce the use of grains in animal feeding, bring about a more dignified treatment of animals as well as reducing the harmful effects of excessive meat consumption on human health. The part for tropical countries is to improve efficiency and productivity. This would substantially reduce harmful effects and pressures on land, water and biodiversity. Smil, 2002)
3.7. Sustainable Livestock Farming
For Murgueitio (2005, P. 14), livestock is the activity that is causing the greatest impact in the tropics, but this does not necessarily has to be the case. Several efforts have been made worldwide in order to seek to change this scenario. This new approach seeks a holistic view of livestock in order to ensure respect for diverse elements such as the water cycle, the biodiversity of dynamic communities, the mineral cycle and the flow of energy (carbon cycle). The most important change is that we are moving from an extractive unidirectional approach towards one in which cycles are respected and recycling concepts are used.
effects on ecosystems. The use of monocultures also depletes the nutrients in the topsoil, which has an effect on decreasing the biota and wildlife. Another effect of monoculture is its strong effect on the water cycle. Water contamination occurs due to its dependence on chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Wetlands have also been dried out and there has been improper use of irrigation. Finally, problems arise in ecosystems from the excessive mechanization that was developed rather for temperate but not tropical zones. Murgueitio (2005) advocates and works for a change in the management model of tropical livestock.
All these current problems in livestock must be solved to manage and administer livestock farming in a manner that is consistent with the environment. Thus, two concepts that seek to improve the relationship between livestock and its environment have been developed. These concepts consist of: sustainable livestock faming and organic livestock farming. (Sierra, 2011)
To explain the difference between these two concepts, it must be stated that sustainable livestock farming seeks to reconcile ancient practices with more environmental concepts, but also maintains and uses processes and tools that are necessary to produce good results in the short term. Notwithstanding, organic livestock farming uses new concepts that are intended to avoid the use of any tool or process that could be harmful to the environment. It is much more restrictive in its application; it has strong standards which are frequently used as marketing and commercialization tools however, owing to the importance given to the environment, it is clearly the purest approach. One way to distinguish unmistakably between the two is that sustainable livestock farming is a transitional step towards organic livestock farming, which is the most desirable model, even if it is not feasible for short-term and economic conditions.
Sustainable farming is a system in which the use of inputs, techniques and practices improve the soil over time, rather than degrade it. It is produced by means of the construction and conservation of soil. The key to sustainable farming is the protection and conservation of soils.
Sierra (2011, 37) develops Wheeler’s perspective by means of three fundamental principles for Sustainable Livestock. These principles are:
The first principle is related to the soil itself, biological soil fertility must be sought; in this sense it is important to avoid mineral excesses and deficiencies in order to obtain the balance between acids and bases in the soil and promote the soil biota, including fungi and mycotoxins that improve soil quality. The next principle is related to the animals’ health and this tends towards maintaining a healthy balance in their internal
ecosystem with a balance between the animal’s essential fatty acids and internal
parasites in consideration of the external movement and natural course of their actual habitat. The third principle aims at an external healthy ecosystem for animals and that includes drinking water, biodiversity, food, use of sunlight and oxygen and anything that generates animal welfare. These three principles are intended to respect natural cycles and maintain soil, animal health and keep the ecosystem in balance in order to generate productivity and sustainability. (Sierra, 2005)
microorganisms. The idea is to achieve healthy environments and environments that improve productivity and animal activity.
The objectives of sustainable livestock farming must be to improve soil productivity and fertility. To achieve this, management and supply chains must guarantee that pastures are in optimal production conditions which are sustainable so that animals that graze are in optimal conditions so that during their grazing they have a productive practice that respects them and protects wildlife and the environment. Respect for the principles and their derivative values generate meaning within the supply chain and demonstrate regard for consumers’ welfare and health.
3.8. Greenhouse Gases and Animal Husbandry.
As has been mentioned above, in 2013, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) estimated that CO2 emissions from livestock were equivalent to 7.1 giga tones. Of these emissions, 41% of emissions were the product of meat production activities. This means that livestock farming generates 2.9 giga tons of CO2 that has harmful effects on the environment and increases global warming and climate change. Beef livestock farming is in a position to further reduce emissions and doing so will improve soil productivity and efficiency of livestock production.
Soil management in livestock farming should be directed towards binding carbon and nitrogen. Carbon that is not well bound, due to lack of coverage in the soil, becomes CO2 and is a major contributor to global warming. The dissolved nitrogen that does not bind well in soil has adverse effects on the atmosphere. Actions that are undertaken in livestock farming should be designed to prevent nitrogen escaping into the atmosphere and that it remains in the soil and further improves its fertility. Additionally, loose nitrogen pollutes water and several animal species, so it is important that the soil be helped to bind these elements that improve its fertility. (Primavesi, 2002)
3.9. Tropical Soils
Soils are complex and diverse ecosystems that exist on earth and on which all living things depend. Changes to the same have direct effects on animals and plants. Therefore, soil care must be paramount and an important goal of agricultural activities. Soils are varied and change depending on their formation, location and climate. Within the literature, it is clear that soils vary substantially due to their very location and climate. Primavesi (2002) has commented that tropical soils are profoundly different from soils in subtropical or temporal regions with seasons. Therefore, different management processes and tools must be used in these regions as both have different priorities.
Tropical soil is a space in which organisms are constantly active due to the ambient temperature; the recycling of nutrients is rapid and continuous which is in direct contrast to soils in temperate or seasonal zones where recycling is slow and regular. Differences in recycling rates require different methods of crop and soil management. Although tropical soils are poor in minerals, this is not necessarily a disadvantage, as they have reasonably good bio-structure, for example, that which is present in the rainforests, which allows soil to generate life and much biological activity. It is important to define and identify the methods for implementing tropical soil management and administration and thusly, potentialize and improve the capabilities of the same. (Sierra, 2011)
Tropical soil is a natural medium consisting of minerals, water, air, organic matter, and living organisms in which plants grow. For the FAO, soil is one of the most complex ecosystems in nature, containing thousands of microorganisms which interact together in global cycles and make all life possible. Soil is a mixture of organic and inorganic materials. Soil is continuously recycling, or cycles where the elements and spaces that enable agricultural production is generated. Fertility is the main function of the efficiency of this cycle of continuous recycling. Soil fertility is produced by four components: physical fertility, chemical fertility, biological fertility, and water fertility. (Sierra, 2011)
Below is a brief description of these different fertilities:
Physical fertility: values soil as the material support for roots and fluid dynamics (how compact is the soil).
Chemical fertility: defines the physical and chemical state of the medium, pH levels and reserves of assimilable elements contained within the soil itself.
Biological Fertility: characterizes the magnitude and organic reserves and soil biological activity.
The destruction of the soil is one of the ways in which natural resources are destroyed due to extractive and intensive exploitation. For Beck (2006), 20% of the planet is dry land and only 8% is usable for agriculture, and this 8% is being abused and overloaded because of poor farming practices. The challenge of production systems is to preserve soil qualities and further improve the fertility of dry land, providing food for all people. Hence, the available literature makes a call to change the management of agriculture in the tropics.
As has been mentioned above, one of the effects of meat production is that it has affected the carbon and nitrogen cycles, with the knock-on effect of affecting soil productivity and, therefore, agricultural production. One of the tasks of proper soil management should be the recovery and regulation of these cycles to help production and the environment. For this reason, a brief explanation of these cycles and their importance will be provided.
The most important soil elements are carbon and nitrogen, together with their relationship and balance. Carbon is important because it is an essential factor in the production of energy. Carbon is very important for soil fertility. It is a fundamental element for maintaining productivity. Nitrogen is important because it is responsible for building tissues. Its relationship creates communicated and energetic fertile soils.
processes: fixation, decomposition, nitrification and denitrification. The four processes are as distinct as their names suggest and refer to how nitrogen is fixed and processed in the soil, as well as its eventual release. Human activity has generated the release of an excess of carbon from the soil, which produces an imbalance, or has led to an excess of nitrogen accumulated in the water, another imbalance. Productive activity in the field must ensure that these cycles are carefully regulated and reach an effective balance. (Sierra, 2005)
3.10. Agroecological Soil Management in Tropical Livestock Farming.
For Forero (2002), since the Spanish conquest, agricultural production methods have not taken the characteristics of the tropical environment into account which has destroyed natural resources and diminished the quality of life of the very people involved in production and consumption processes. This type of ecological management is still in force today with its perverse consequences. Technologies, techniques and methods of administration that are incompatible with the characteristics of tropical soils continue to be imported. Therefore, it is urgent to apply technical and production models that take soil characteristics and needs of recycling and sustainability into account.
Likewise for Sierra (2011), there are some basic rules for agroecological sustainability management, which are listed below:
1. Total soil nutrients, together with humic acids, and adequate moisture equals sustainability. Balanced mixture.
2. In order for plants to absorb nutrients efficiently, minerals should be subject to the mechanisms of transfer and storage of acidic soil.
3. Any organic material applied to the soil will be dissolved and converted into different acids in the soil.
