当涉及到撒哈拉以南非洲的矿物肥料使用时,农业生态学的减少投入原则是错误的

IF 3.5 3区 经济学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Gatien N Falconnier, Rémi Cardinael, Marc Corbeels, Frédéric Baudron, Pauline Chivenge, Antoine Couëdel, Aude Ripoche, François Affholder, Krishna Naudin, Emilie Benaillon, Leonard Rusinamhodzi, Louise Leroux, Bernard Vanlauwe, Ken E Giller
{"title":"当涉及到撒哈拉以南非洲的矿物肥料使用时,农业生态学的减少投入原则是错误的","authors":"Gatien N Falconnier, Rémi Cardinael, Marc Corbeels, Frédéric Baudron, Pauline Chivenge, Antoine Couëdel, Aude Ripoche, François Affholder, Krishna Naudin, Emilie Benaillon, Leonard Rusinamhodzi, Louise Leroux, Bernard Vanlauwe, Ken E Giller","doi":"10.1177/00307270231199795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Can farmers in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) boost crop yields and improve food availability without using more mineral fertilizer? This question has been at the center of lively debates among the civil society, policy-makers, and in academic editorials. Proponents of the “yes” answer have put forward the “input reduction” principle of agroecology, i.e. by relying on agrobiodiversity, recycling and better efficiency, agroecological practices such as the use of legumes and manure can increase crop productivity without the need for more mineral fertilizer. We reviewed decades of scientific literature on nutrient balances in SSA, biological nitrogen fixation of tropical legumes, manure production and use in smallholder farming systems, and the environmental impact of mineral fertilizer. Our analyses show that more mineral fertilizer is needed in SSA for five reasons: (i) the starting point in SSA is that agricultural production is “agroecological” by default, that is, very low mineral fertilizer use, widespread mixed crop-livestock systems and large crop diversity including legumes, but leading to poor soil fertility as a result of widespread soil nutrient mining, (ii) the nitrogen needs of crops cannot be adequately met solely through biological nitrogen fixation by legumes and recycling of animal manure, (iii) other nutrients like phosphorus and potassium need to be replaced continuously, (iv) mineral fertilizers, if used appropriately, cause little harm to the environment, and (v) reducing the use of mineral fertilizers would hamper productivity gains and contribute indirectly to agricultural expansion and to deforestation. Yet, the agroecological principles directly related to soil fertility—recycling, efficiency, diversity—remain key in improving soil health and nutrient-use efficiency, and are critical to sustaining crop productivity in the long run. We argue for a nuanced position that acknowledges the critical need for more mineral fertilizers in SSA, in combination with the use of agroecological practices and adequate policy support.","PeriodicalId":54661,"journal":{"name":"Outlook on Agriculture","volume":"75 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The input reduction principle of agroecology is wrong when it comes to mineral fertilizer use in sub-Saharan Africa\",\"authors\":\"Gatien N Falconnier, Rémi Cardinael, Marc Corbeels, Frédéric Baudron, Pauline Chivenge, Antoine Couëdel, Aude Ripoche, François Affholder, Krishna Naudin, Emilie Benaillon, Leonard Rusinamhodzi, Louise Leroux, Bernard Vanlauwe, Ken E Giller\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00307270231199795\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Can farmers in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) boost crop yields and improve food availability without using more mineral fertilizer? This question has been at the center of lively debates among the civil society, policy-makers, and in academic editorials. Proponents of the “yes” answer have put forward the “input reduction” principle of agroecology, i.e. by relying on agrobiodiversity, recycling and better efficiency, agroecological practices such as the use of legumes and manure can increase crop productivity without the need for more mineral fertilizer. We reviewed decades of scientific literature on nutrient balances in SSA, biological nitrogen fixation of tropical legumes, manure production and use in smallholder farming systems, and the environmental impact of mineral fertilizer. Our analyses show that more mineral fertilizer is needed in SSA for five reasons: (i) the starting point in SSA is that agricultural production is “agroecological” by default, that is, very low mineral fertilizer use, widespread mixed crop-livestock systems and large crop diversity including legumes, but leading to poor soil fertility as a result of widespread soil nutrient mining, (ii) the nitrogen needs of crops cannot be adequately met solely through biological nitrogen fixation by legumes and recycling of animal manure, (iii) other nutrients like phosphorus and potassium need to be replaced continuously, (iv) mineral fertilizers, if used appropriately, cause little harm to the environment, and (v) reducing the use of mineral fertilizers would hamper productivity gains and contribute indirectly to agricultural expansion and to deforestation. Yet, the agroecological principles directly related to soil fertility—recycling, efficiency, diversity—remain key in improving soil health and nutrient-use efficiency, and are critical to sustaining crop productivity in the long run. We argue for a nuanced position that acknowledges the critical need for more mineral fertilizers in SSA, in combination with the use of agroecological practices and adequate policy support.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54661,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Outlook on Agriculture\",\"volume\":\"75 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Outlook on Agriculture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00307270231199795\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Outlook on Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00307270231199795","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

撒哈拉以南非洲(SSA)的农民能否在不使用更多矿物肥料的情况下提高作物产量并改善粮食供应?这个问题一直是民间社会、政策制定者和学术社论热烈讨论的中心问题。“是”的支持者提出了生态农业的“减少投入”原则,即依靠农业生物多样性、循环利用和更高的效率,使用豆类和粪肥等生态农业实践可以提高作物生产力,而不需要更多的矿物肥料。我们回顾了近几十年来关于热带草原养分平衡、热带豆科植物生物固氮、小农农业系统的粪肥生产和利用以及矿物肥料对环境影响的科学文献。我们的分析表明,SSA需要更多的矿物肥料有五个原因:(i) SSA的出发点是农业生产默认为“农业生态”,即矿物肥料的使用非常低,广泛的作物-牲畜混合系统和包括豆类在内的作物多样性很大,但由于广泛的土壤养分开采,导致土壤肥力低下;(ii)仅通过豆类的生物固氮和动物粪便的循环利用不能充分满足作物的氮需求。(三)磷和钾等其他营养物质需要不断得到补充;(四)矿物肥料如果使用得当,对环境的危害很小;(五)减少矿物肥料的使用将妨碍生产力的提高,并间接促进农业扩张和森林砍伐。然而,与土壤肥力直接相关的农业生态原则——循环、效率、多样性——仍然是改善土壤健康和养分利用效率的关键,也是长期维持作物生产力的关键。我们主张采取一种微妙的立场,承认SSA迫切需要更多的矿物肥料,同时结合农业生态实践的使用和适当的政策支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The input reduction principle of agroecology is wrong when it comes to mineral fertilizer use in sub-Saharan Africa
Can farmers in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) boost crop yields and improve food availability without using more mineral fertilizer? This question has been at the center of lively debates among the civil society, policy-makers, and in academic editorials. Proponents of the “yes” answer have put forward the “input reduction” principle of agroecology, i.e. by relying on agrobiodiversity, recycling and better efficiency, agroecological practices such as the use of legumes and manure can increase crop productivity without the need for more mineral fertilizer. We reviewed decades of scientific literature on nutrient balances in SSA, biological nitrogen fixation of tropical legumes, manure production and use in smallholder farming systems, and the environmental impact of mineral fertilizer. Our analyses show that more mineral fertilizer is needed in SSA for five reasons: (i) the starting point in SSA is that agricultural production is “agroecological” by default, that is, very low mineral fertilizer use, widespread mixed crop-livestock systems and large crop diversity including legumes, but leading to poor soil fertility as a result of widespread soil nutrient mining, (ii) the nitrogen needs of crops cannot be adequately met solely through biological nitrogen fixation by legumes and recycling of animal manure, (iii) other nutrients like phosphorus and potassium need to be replaced continuously, (iv) mineral fertilizers, if used appropriately, cause little harm to the environment, and (v) reducing the use of mineral fertilizers would hamper productivity gains and contribute indirectly to agricultural expansion and to deforestation. Yet, the agroecological principles directly related to soil fertility—recycling, efficiency, diversity—remain key in improving soil health and nutrient-use efficiency, and are critical to sustaining crop productivity in the long run. We argue for a nuanced position that acknowledges the critical need for more mineral fertilizers in SSA, in combination with the use of agroecological practices and adequate policy support.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Outlook on Agriculture
Outlook on Agriculture 农林科学-农业综合
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
38
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Outlook on Agriculture is a peer reviewed journal, published quarterly, which welcomes original research papers, research notes, invited reviews and commentary for an international and interdisciplinary readership. Special attention is paid to agricultural policy, international trade in the agricultural sector, strategic developments in food production, the links between agricultural systems and food security, the role of agriculture in social and economic development, agriculture in developing countries and environmental issues, including natural resources for agriculture and climate impacts.
×
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