Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems

Background: Practices such as the establishment of monocultures, the use of herbicides and overgrazing in tropical cattle ranching have led to deforestation and soil degradation in extensive areas of natural vegetation, causing local and global environmental consequences. In the state of Yucatán, different actors have created initiatives to avoid these consequences through the design, dissemination and implementation of sustainable practices among cattle producers. Objective: This paper seeks to understand how the structure of institutional networks affects the dissemination of sustainable livestock practices for the management of water, soil, biodiversity, forage and animals, which favor a transition to sustainability for the livestock sector in Yucatan. As a case study, the project coordinated by the Universidad de Yucatan for the establishment of intensive silvopastoral systems (ISPS) is analyzed, particularly the scope of the project to transform the practices of livestock farmers in the state of Yucatan and the role played by institutions linked to livestock issues to promote or obstruct this transformation. Methodology: The research was carried out by means of interviews with actors identified by their position in the different institutions linked to cattle raising. The multilevel perspective (MLP) was used to classify the different actors involved in the categories of landscape, regime or niche, according to their institutional powers in cattle ranching issues. An institutional network analysis was also carried out and a computer simulation was run using a random walker to identify the most frequent routes and connections between nodes. The nodes of the network represent the institutions mentioned during the interviews. Results: Secretaría de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural (SADER), Secretaría de Desarrollo Rural (SEDER), Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán (UADY), Unión Ganadera Regional General de Yucatán (UGRGY), Unión Ganadera Regional del Oriente de Yucatán (UGROY) as well as The Nature Conservancy (TNC). Implications: The statistical analysis shows little communication among nodes and the paths that allow the different actors to interact generally pass through a few of them with greater centrality. Conclusion: The faculties of each institution are designed for a vertical execution of public policies that leaves many actors without the possibility of participation particularly when existing programs have a short-term vision that hinders innovation and the achievement of a specific sustainability goal.

Sustainability; Institutional networks; Innovation; Socio-technical systems; Cattle producers.

Baldassarri, D. and Diani, M., 2007. The Integrative Power of Civic Networks. American Journal of Sociology, 113(3), pp. 735-780. https://doi.org/10.1086/521839

Barabási, A.L. and Pósfai, M., 2016. Network science. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Bello, F.D., 2006. Consecuencias de cambios de presión ganadera sobre la estructura de la vegetación a lo largo de gradientes climáticos. Ecosistemas, 15, pp. 106-112. http://www.revistaecosistemas.net/articulo.asp?Id=411

Bodin, O., 2017. Collaborative environmental governance: Achieving collective action in social-ecological systems. Science, 357(6352), p. eaan1114. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan1114

Bodin, O. and Crona, B., 2009. The role of social networks in natural resource governance: What relational patterns make a difference? Global Environmental Change, 19, pp. 366–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.05.002

Broom, D.M., Galindo, F. A. and Murgueitio, E., 2013. Sustainable, efficient livestock production with high biodiversity and good welfare for animals. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280(1771), p. 20132025. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2025

Bukchin, S. and Kerret, D., 2020. Character strengths and sustainable technology adoption by smallholder farmers. Heliyon, 6(8), E04694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04694

Calliari, E., Michetti, M., Farnia, L. and Ramieri, E., 2019. A network approach for moving from planning to implementation in climate change adaptation: Evidence from southern Mexico. Environmental Science & Policy, 93, pp. 146-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.11.025

Campbell, A. and King, A.E.H., 2022. Choosing Sustainability: Decision Making and Sustainable Practice Adoption with Examples from U.S. Great Plains Cattle Grazing Systems. Animals, 12(3), p. 286. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12030286

Casanova-Lugo, F., Petit-Aldana, J. and Solorio-Sánchez, J., 2011. Los sistemas agroforestales como alternativa a la captura de carbono en el trópico mexicano. Revista Chapingo Serie Ciencias Forestales y del Ambiente, 17(1), pp. 133-143. https://doi.org/10.5154/r.rchscfa.2010.08.047

Cederberg, C., Berglund, M., Gustavsson, J. and Wallman, M., 2012. Environmental impacts from livestock production with different animal welfare potentials-a literature review. SIK report 844. – Göteborg:Institutet för livsmedel och bioteknik. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:944129/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Cid, A., and Lerner, A.M., 2023. Local governments as key agents in climate change adaptation: Challenges and opportunities for institutional capacity-building in Mexico. Climate Policy, 23(5), pp. 649-661. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2022.2163972

Codling, E.A., Plank, M.J. and Benhamou, S., 2008. Random walk models in biology. Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 5(25), pp. 813-834. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2008.0014

De la Fuente, E.B. and Suárez, S.A., 2008. Problemas ambientales asociados a la actividad humana: la agricultura. Asociación Argentina de Ecología. Ecología Austral 18(3), pp. 239–252. https://ojs.ecologiaaustral.com.ar/index.php/Ecologia_Austral/article/view/1373

El Bilali, H., 2019. The Multi-Level Perspective in Research on Sustainability Transitions in Agriculture and Food Systems: A Systematic Review. Agriculture, 9(4), p. 74. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture9040074

Erd?s, P. and Rényi, A., 1959. On Random Graphs. Publicationes Mathematicae Debrecen, 6, 290-297. https://snap.stanford.edu/class/cs224w-readings/erdos59random.pdf

FAO, 2013. Enfrentado el cambio climático a través de la ganadería. Una evaluación global de las emisiones y oportunidades de mitigación. Roma:FAO. www.fao.org/publications.

FAO, 2018. Shaping the future of livestock: sustainably, responsibly, efficiently. The 10th Global Forum for Food and Agriculture (GFFA) Berlin. Rome:FAO.

Ferguson, B.G., Diemont, S.A.W., Alfaro-Arguello, R., Martin, J.F., Nahed-Toral, J., Álvarez-Solís, D. and Pinto-Ruíz, R., 2013. Sustainability of holistic and conventional cattle ranching in the seasonally dry tropics of Chiapas, Mexico. Agricultural Systems, 120, pp. 38-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2013.05.005

Flores, M. and Solorio, B., 2012. Fomento y desarrollo de sistemas silvopastoriles intensivos. Morelia:Fundación Produce.

Frantzeskaki, N., Loorbach, D. and Meadowcroft, J., 2012. Governing societal transitions to sustainability. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 15(1/2), p. 19-36. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2012.044032

Geels, F.W., 2006. Multi-Level Perspective on System Innovation: Relevance for Industrial Transformation. En X. Olsthoorn and A. J. Wieczorek (Eds.), Understanding Industrial Transformation 44, pp. 163-186. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4418-6_9

Geels, F.W., 2011. The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1(1), pp. 24-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.002

Geels, F.W., 2019. Socio-technical transitions to sustainability: A review of criticisms and elaborations of the Multi-Level Perspective. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 39, pp. 187-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.06.009

Gligo, N., and Morello, J., 2011. Notas sobre la historia ecológica de América Latina. Estudios Internacionales, 13(49), pp. 112-148. https://doi.org/10.5354/0719-3769.1980.16622

Gobierno de Yucatan, 2022 Programas para la ganadería. Mérida:Secretaria de Fomento Económico y Trabajo. https://www.yucatan.gob.mx/ciudadano/ver_programa.php?id=59

Hagberg, A., Schult D. and Swart P., 2008. Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using NetworkX. In: Varoquaux G., Vaught T., and Millman J., (eds) Proceedings of the 7th Python in Science Conference (SciPy2008), Pasadena, CA USA. https://conference.scipy.org/proceedings/SciPy2008/paper_2/

Hodgson, G.M., 2006. What Are Institutions? Journal of Economic Issues, 40(1), pp. 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2006.11506879

Julca-Otiniano, A., Meneses-Florián, L., Blas-Sevillano, R. and Bello-Amez, S., 2006. La materia orgánica, importancia y experiencia de su uso en la agricultura. Idesia (Arica), 24(1), pp.49-61. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-34292006000100009

Kenny, D.C. and Castilla-Rho, J., 2022. What Prevents the Adoption of Regenerative Agriculture and What Can We Do about It? Lessons and Narratives from a Participatory Modelling Exercise in Australia. Land, 11(9), p. 1383. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091383

Marcillo, R.L.G., 2018. La implementación de los Sistemas Silvopastoriles en el Cantón Joya de Los Sachas. European Scientific Journal, 14(27), p. 357. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2018.v14n27p357

Levy, M.A. and Lubell, M.N., 2018. Innovation, cooperation, and the structure of three regional sustainable agriculture networks in California. Regional Environmental Change, 18(4), pp. 1235-1246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1258-6

Mahecha, L., 2003. Importancia de los sistemas silvopastoriles y principales limitantes para su implementación en la ganadería colombiana. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias, 16(1), pp. 11-18. http://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rccp.323847

Marcillo, R.L.G., 2018. Investigación De Las Actitudes De Los Productores Ganaderos En La Implementación De Los Sistemas Silvopastoriles En El Cantón Joya De Los Sachas. European Scientific Journal, 14(27), p. 357. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2018.v14n27p357

Morçöl, G., 2014. Complex Governance Networks: An Assessment of the Advances and Prospects. Complexity, Governance & Networks, 1(1), p. 5. https://doi.org/10.7564/14-CGN5

Moser, S. C., Ekstrom, J. A., Kim, J. and Heitsch, S., 2019. Adaptation finance archetypes: local governments’ persistent challenges of funding adaptation to climate change and ways to overcome them. Ecology and Society, 24(2), p. 28. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10980-240228

Murgueitio, E., Cuellar, P., Ibrahim, M., Gobbi, J., Cuartas, C.A., Naranjo, J.F., Zapata, A., Mejía, C.E. and Zuluaga, A.F., 2006. Adopción de Sistemas Agroforestales Pecuarios Pastos y Forrajes, 29(4), pp. 365-381. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=269121676003

Patiño, M., Moreira, V., Echeverría, R. and Nahuelhual L., 2009. Factores que determinan la adopción de prácticas de conservación del agua en sistemas ganaderos de la cuenca alta del río Guarinó (Caldas, Colombia). Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias, 2012, 25(1), pp. 46-55. http://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rccp.324732

Mutyasira, V., Hoag, D. and Pendell, D., 2018. The adoption of sustainable agricultural practices by smallholder farmers in Ethiopian highlands: An integrative approach. Cogent Food & Agriculture, 4(1), p. 1552439. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2018.1552439

Ndah, H.T., Schuler, J., Nkwain, V.N., Nzogela, B., Mangesho, W., Mollel, R., Loina, R., Zander, P. and Paul, B.K., 2022. Determinants for Smallholder Farmers’ Adoption of Improved Forages in Dairy Production Systems: The Case of Tanga Region, Tanzania. Agronomy, 12(2), p. 305. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12020305

Ortiz, W. and Vilsmaier, U., 2022. Transcending the Locality of Grassroots Initiatives: Diffusion of Sustainability Knowledge and Practice through Transdisciplinary Research. Sustainability, 14(19), p.12259. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912259

Ravera, F., Tarrasón, D., Pastor, P. A. and Grasa, R., 2009. Proceso y métodos de evaluación integrada participativa de degradación en agroecosistemas semiáridos. Un caso de estudio en un área protegida en el trópico seco nicaragüense. REVIBEC: Revista Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica, 13, pp. 79-99. https://raco.cat/index.php/Revibec/article/view/164824.

SEDER, 2023. Dirección de ganadería. Mérida:Secretaria de Desarrollo Rural. https://desarrollorural.yucatan.gob.mx/secciones/ver/direccion-de-ganaderia

Shannon, P., Markiel, A., Ozier, O., Baliga, N.S., Wang, J.T., Ramage, D., Amin, N., Schwikowski, B., Ideker, T., 2003. Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Research, 13, pp. 2498-2504. http://doi.org/10.1101/gr.1239303

Smajgl, A., Ward, J.R., Foran, T., Dore, J. and Larson, S., 2015. Visions, beliefs, and transformation: Exploring cross-sector and transboundary dynamics in the wider Mekong region. Ecology and Society, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07421-200215

Van Buuren, A. and Loorbach, D., 2009. Policy innovation in isolation?: Conditions for policy renewal by transition arenas and pilot projects. Public Management Review, 11(3), pp. 375-392. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030902798289

Villarroel-Molina, O., De-Pablos-Heredero, C., Rangel, J., Vitale, M.P. and García, A., 2021. Usefulness of Network Analysis to Characterize Technology Leaders in Small Dual-Purpose Cattle Farms in Mexico. Sustainability, 13(4), p. 2291. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042291

Zepeda Cancino, R.M., Velasco Zebadúa, M.E., Nahed Toral, J., Hernández Garay, A. and Martínez Tinajero, J.J., 2016a. Adopción de sistemas silvopastoriles y contexto sociocultural de los productores: Apoyos y limitantes. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias, 7(4), pp. 471-488. https://doi.org/10.22319/rmcp.v7i4.4282

Zu Ermgassen, E., Alcântara, M., Balmford, A., Barioni, L., Neto, F., Bettarello, M., Brito, G., Carrero, G., Florence, E., Garcia, E., Gonçalves, E., da Luz, C., Mallman, G., Strassburg, B., Valentim, J. and Latawiec, A., 2018. Results from On-The-Ground Efforts to Promote Sustainable Cattle Ranching in the Brazilian Amazon. Sustainability, 10(4), p. 1301. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041301