Wenceslao Apan Salcedo, José Nahed Toral, Esaú Pérez Luna, Angel Piñeiro Vázquez, Guillermo Jiménez Ferrer


Background. Silvopastoral systems are viable agroforestry option to move toward sustainable livestock and rural development. Objective. to analyze the level of adoption of silvopastoral techniques by beneficiary producers of three converging projects in the Sierra Madre de Chiapas region (Mexico), during the 2008-2017 period. Methodology. Forty-two Cattle Production Units (UPP, for its acronym in Spanish) from the municipalities of Villaflores, La Concordia and Pijijiapan (Chiapas) were diagnosed by socioeconomic and technical variables. A Silvopastoral Systems Development Index (IDESSP, for its acronym in Spanish) was used to evaluate their level of adoption. Results. The global IDESSP of UPP was 52%. UPP in the “High” level of adoption reached an IDESSP of 74% (± 6.2), “Medium” an index of 56% (± 5.3) and located in the “Low” group was 42% (± 3.1). The socio-educational characteristics (age of the producer, years of experience in livestock activity, education level) and the productive variables (land area, herd size, milk production / day, annual income) were different (P <0.05) between the groups. The significant variables (P> 0.001) that allowed a greater adoption of silvopastoral practices were the average annual income of each family, the availability of total land, and the collaboration that the rancher had with other social sectors.  Implications. The low adoption of silvopastoral techniques encourages the continuation of conventional livestock practices with negative effects on natural resources, diminishes the capacities for strengthening and social organization, and limits the processes of scaling-up or massification of SSP. Conclusions. The level of adoption of silvopastoral techniques among the UPP was intermediate, which was subject to availability of land, years of experience, educational level and number of links for the production of each owner of the production units, the area under actions of conservation were greater than silvopastoral techniques.


Agroforestry; adoption; silvopastoralism; livestock; technology transfer.

Full Text:


URN: http://www.revista.ccba.uady.mx/urn:ISSN:1870-0462-tsaes.v25i2.40014

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.56369/tsaes.4001

Copyright (c) 2022 José Nahed Toral, Wenceslao Apan Salcedo, Esaú Pérez Luna, Angel Piñeiro Vázquez, Guillermo Jiménez Ferrer

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.