Skip to main content
ARS Home » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #128769
Title: AN ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL TRADEOFF ANALYSIS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL CROPPING SYSTEMS

Author
item Lu, Yao
item Teasdale, John
item HUANG, WEN - ERS

Submitted to: Journal of Sustainable Agriculture
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 6/18/2002
Publication Date: 3/1/2003
Citation: LU, Y.C., TEASDALE, J.R., HUANG, W.T. AN ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL TRADEOFF ANALYSIS OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL CROPPING SYSTEMS. JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE. VOL. 22(3). 2003.

Interpretive Summary: This paper evaluated the tradeoffs among gross margins, soil erosion, nutrient losses, and herbicide hazards using simulated data of the six reduced-tillage cropping systems in Maryland. The results indicated that a no-tillage corn-soybean rotation with winter annual cover crops and zero nitrogen inputs was the most profitable to risk neutral farmers and presented minimal erosion risk and no risk of herbicide losses. On the other hand, two reduced-tillage organic systems would be more attractive to risk averse farmers because of lower risks based on lower year-to-year variability of profits as well as low erosion risk and no pesticide usage. However, all systems had nitrogen runoff that exceeded threshold levels in at least two-thirds of the simulation years. In addition, systems that were lowest in nitrogen runoff were highest in phosphorus losses. Thus control of nutrient losses while maintaining profitable production levels represents a major challenge to the design of sustainable cropping systems.

Technical Abstract: This study used the results of 60-year simulation based on data from the Sustainable Agricultural Demonstration site at the USDA, ARS, Beltsville Agricultural Research Center in Beltsville, Maryland, to analyze tradeoffs between profitability and environmental stewardship. Six grain cropping systems included two no-tillage rotations with recommended fertilizer and herbicide inputs, two no-tillage rotations with winter annual cover crops along with reduced herbicide and nitrogen inputs, and two reduced-tillage organic rotations. Economic analysis showed that highest gross margins were obtained by a cover crop-based system with zero nitrogen inputs (CCZ). Risk analysis showed that the organic systems had lower profit variability across years and, therefore, would be most attractive to risk averse farmers. Both the cover crop-based systems and organic systems had low erosion risks and no risk of herbicide contamination so there were no profit versus erosion or herbicide tradeoffs amongst these systems. All systems had nitrogen runoff that exceeded threshold levels in at least two-thirds of the simulation years. In addition, systems that were lowest in nitrogen runoff were highest in phosphorus losses. This resulted in tradeoffs for risk neutral farmers between higher profitability along with higher nitrogen runoff for the CCZ system versus lower profitability along with lower nitrogen runoff for the organic systems. In contrast, averse risk farmers would have a tradeoff between lower economic risk along with higher phosphorus loss in the organic systems versus higher economic risk along with lower phosphorus loss for the CCZ system. Thus, control of nutrient losses while maintaining profitable production levels represents a major challenge to the design of sustainable cropping systems.