ArticleScientific reports2024
Unlocking sustainable livestock production potential in the Colombian Amazon through paddock division and gender inclusivity.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Low-emissions livestock production can be achieved through scaling production systems integrating trees, forages, and livestock within the same area. Such systems are known as silvopastoral production systems (SPS). However, despite SPS reported benefits, adoption rates globally remain low. This paper, therefore, aims to inform land use policy oriented towards increasing SPS adoption. This study intends to capture this by assessing SPS adoption benefits, identifying determinants of SPS adoption, and thus to contribute to policy for scaling low-emissions livestock production. Data was collected on socioeconomic status, livestock farming technical and economic indicators, and farm and paddock practices through farm-level surveys in four municipalities in the Amazon Piedmont of Colombia. Unlike previous studies that assume homogeneous farm management, when in fact, it is heterogeneous, this study assessed SPS adoption determinants using the paddock (n = 2819) as the unit of analysis. This methodological approach is consistent with paddock-level land use decisions taken by farmers based on socioeconomic and biophysical factors such as soil financial resources, type, and topography. The methodological approach allows us to provide new insights into the determinant of adopting SPS and an understanding of intra-farm level land use decisions. The results show that the adoption of SPS at both paddocks and farm levels in Caquetá is low. The main factors associated with higher SPS adoption levels at the paddock level are framed in gender, resources, and knowledge. We observe that women are more motivated to conserve the environment. Cattle paddocks managed by women, smaller in size, and those with more SPS-related projects show a tendency for medium or high SPS adoption. Furthermore, the positive relationship between access to credit and SPS adoption emphasizes the importance of financial resources tailored to SPS projects. Enhancing gender roles, improving access to finance in land use, and providing training programs on SPS systems can contribute to low-emission livestock production in Colombia. This research paper highlights the significance of implementing diverse management strategies and reaching out to farmers not involved in SPS projects. It emphasizes investments in low-emission livestock production, especially for female heads of households. This approach recognizes the broader benefits of SPS, beyond production and financial gains, promoting the division of paddocks and the adoption of SPS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.