Monocropping vs mixed cropping systems under a changing climate: Smallholder farmers' perceptions and farm profitability in Eastern Rwanda

IF 5.4 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Hashakimana Léonidas , Tessema Toru , Niyitanga Fidèle , Mulugeta D. Watabaji , Tadele Bedo Gelete , Hirwa Hubert
{"title":"Monocropping vs mixed cropping systems under a changing climate: Smallholder farmers' perceptions and farm profitability in Eastern Rwanda","authors":"Hashakimana Léonidas ,&nbsp;Tessema Toru ,&nbsp;Niyitanga Fidèle ,&nbsp;Mulugeta D. Watabaji ,&nbsp;Tadele Bedo Gelete ,&nbsp;Hirwa Hubert","doi":"10.1016/j.indic.2024.100527","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Traditionally, mixed cropping (MxC) has been Rwanda's smallholder farming technology used to sustainably manage farmlands for family subsistence while forming dynamic and climate-resilient agroecosystems. Yet, its significance is overlooked over monocropping (MnC) adopted at dissent since the inception of Crop Intensification Program (CIP) in Rwanda. Thus, this study sought to analyze and compare MnC and MxC systems based on farmers' perceptions and farm profitability in drought-prone areas of Kayonza district in Eastern Province of Rwanda. The farmers' perceptions were assessed using questionnaires, focus group discussions (FGDs), and in-depth group interviews (IDGIs). The farm profitability was assessed using revenue-cost ratio (RCR) analysis. Purposive and multi-stage random sampling techniques were used for selecting sample households (n = 196). The data were analyzed using IBM SPSS software (version 25). Thematic content analysis method and Pearson correlations were used to analyze farmers' perceptions. The binomial logit model was used to determine the effect of the selected determinants on adopting either MxC or MnC. The results show that the majority of the respondents were more involved in MxC during short-rainy and dry seasons (98%) than MnC. Household heads' sex, family size, access to credit services, access to weather and climate information, access to extension services, social group membership, and farm income were highlighted to motivate farmers to adopt MxC systems. The latter was, therefore, shown to be more socio-economically and ecologically beneficial to farmers than MnC under drought conditions as it was chosen and adopted by most smallholder farmers and provided higher on-farm benefits (RCR&gt;4).</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36171,"journal":{"name":"Environmental and Sustainability Indicators","volume":"24 ","pages":"Article 100527"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental and Sustainability Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665972724001958","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Traditionally, mixed cropping (MxC) has been Rwanda's smallholder farming technology used to sustainably manage farmlands for family subsistence while forming dynamic and climate-resilient agroecosystems. Yet, its significance is overlooked over monocropping (MnC) adopted at dissent since the inception of Crop Intensification Program (CIP) in Rwanda. Thus, this study sought to analyze and compare MnC and MxC systems based on farmers' perceptions and farm profitability in drought-prone areas of Kayonza district in Eastern Province of Rwanda. The farmers' perceptions were assessed using questionnaires, focus group discussions (FGDs), and in-depth group interviews (IDGIs). The farm profitability was assessed using revenue-cost ratio (RCR) analysis. Purposive and multi-stage random sampling techniques were used for selecting sample households (n = 196). The data were analyzed using IBM SPSS software (version 25). Thematic content analysis method and Pearson correlations were used to analyze farmers' perceptions. The binomial logit model was used to determine the effect of the selected determinants on adopting either MxC or MnC. The results show that the majority of the respondents were more involved in MxC during short-rainy and dry seasons (98%) than MnC. Household heads' sex, family size, access to credit services, access to weather and climate information, access to extension services, social group membership, and farm income were highlighted to motivate farmers to adopt MxC systems. The latter was, therefore, shown to be more socio-economically and ecologically beneficial to farmers than MnC under drought conditions as it was chosen and adopted by most smallholder farmers and provided higher on-farm benefits (RCR>4).
不断变化的气候条件下的单作与混作系统:卢旺达东部小农户的看法和农业盈利能力
传统上,混合种植(MxC)一直是卢旺达的小农耕作技术,用于对农田进行可持续管理,以维持家庭生计,同时形成具有活力和气候适应能力的农业生态系统。然而,与卢旺达开始实施作物集约化计划(CIP)以来在不同意见中采用的单作物种植(MnC)相比,它的重要性被忽视了。因此,本研究试图根据卢旺达东部省卡永扎区干旱易发地区农民的看法和农业收益率,分析和比较 MnC 和 MxC 系统。通过问卷调查、焦点小组讨论(FGDs)和深入小组访谈(IDGIs)对农民的看法进行了评估。采用收入成本比分析法评估了农场的盈利能力。采用有目的和多阶段随机抽样技术选择样本家庭(n = 196)。数据使用 IBM SPSS 软件(第 25 版)进行分析。采用主题内容分析法和皮尔逊相关法分析农民的看法。采用二项对数模型确定所选决定因素对采用 MxC 或 MnC 的影响。结果表明,大多数受访者在短雨季和旱季(98%)比锰酸钾更多地参与锰酸钾种植。户主的性别、家庭规模、获得信贷服务的机会、获得天气和气候信息的机会、获得推广服务的机会、社会团体成员资格和农业收入都是促使农民采用多品种栽培技术的重要因素。因此,在干旱条件下,与锰酸铜相比,锰酸铜对农民的社会经济和生态效益更高,因为大多数小农都选择和采用了锰酸铜,并获得了更高的农场效益(RCR>4)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental and Sustainability Indicators
Environmental and Sustainability Indicators Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
2.30%
发文量
49
审稿时长
57 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信