Suchergebnisse

Not Available ; Rainfed agro-ecoecosystem represents the largest agricultural production system of India. It accounts for over 65 % of the net cultivated area, houses 40 % of human and over 60 % of cattle population. Yet this region witnesses deprivation and high incidence of poverty. Agriculture here depends entirely on the erratic and ill-distributed rainfall. High risk associated with low investment capacity of farmers often results in higher rate of migration, school dropouts, food insecurity and poverty. Though there is a considerable fund of knowledge to help tackle the problem of low agricultural productivity, it has often not succeeded in translating the gains into reduced poverty and improved rural livelihoods. The awareness that the problems faced by the rural society are far more complex and that better technology alone is not the answer (Ramachandran and Mahipal 1999) is gaining ground. And that facilitating rural communities with an enabling environment will go a long way in tackling the problems is being increasingly realized. In the present context of 'global village' the gap between the urban 'knowledge society' and the rural society is much wider and felt more significantly than perhaps two decades ago. Technological divide between the rich and the poor, and the rural and the urban have long existed. But this has never been so strongly felt as is felt in the present era of 'information age'. It is being strongly recognized that agriculture sector in general and rainfed agriculture in particular has been bypassed by the advancements in information and communication technology (ICT) that has swept the industry and the service sectors. It is heartening to note that this opinion is echoed in several fora and the government and the civil society are debating this issue at length. The paradigm of agricultural development and poverty alleviation through out the developing world is assuming far more complex forms. Thus, conventional ways of delivering to the agrarian societies and the rural poor are being challenged. Aside from biotechnology, the on-going revolution in ICT is being seen as holding tremendous hope for 'reaching the un-reached' (Dar 2004). Developments in ICT have transformed traditional societies into knowledge societies. When used as a tool for providing the rural poor with knowledge that helps them to avail a better livelihood, ICT can potentially herald a new era in development sciences. Technically, it can build communities across great distances and bring people together. It can complement and supplement the existing extension and communication systems and improve efficiency. It can expand information flow, make knowledge more accessible to people across a wider area and to facilitate the poor to make better choices, articulate opinions, demand rights, and to have more control over the way they want to live. 217 The potential is enormous. The problems are plenty. And the options are many. There is evidence of many pilot projects having made significant changes in the lives of the rural poor. These are highly sporadic and too few to significantly impact the magnitude of problems rural India is facing. But there is a long and tough way ahead. The need of the hour however is a carefully planned ICT4D policy to be implemented efficiently ; Not Available

Not Available ; The rainfed agro ecosystem is one of the largest components of the production systems research under NATP. This ecosystem is most diverse in terms of natural resources, farming systems and livestock and also quite challenging for technology development and transfer. With 103 PSR and 24 TAR-IVLP projects, the rainfed agro ecosystem covered thousands of farmers across the length and breadth of the country. Participatory on-farm research has been the main strength of the projects in this agro ecosystem. The worst drought experienced during kharif 2002 posed both challenges and opportunities to the scientists working in the rainfed agro ecosystem. In large number of on-farm trials, the scientists could demonstrate the viability and economic feasibility of water conservation technologies on an operational scale. At the same time the continued vulnerability of crop production at many locations due to drought pointed to many research and extension gaps which need to be addressed in future not only under NATP but in the regular programmes as well. It is gratifying to note that some of the technologies on water harvesting demonstrated on an operational scale in participation of the farmers particularly in the states of Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand convinced the respective State Governments to come forward with schemes for wider replication. I am happy to note that projects in the area of post harvest technology have made excellent progress and the scientists began to collaborate with entrepreneurs for possible commercialization. This public – private partnership is vital for achieving the much needed value addition in our agriculture. I would like to complement Dr.H.P.Singh, Dr.Y.S.Ramakrishna, AEDs and Dr.B.Venkateswarlu, Principal Production System Scientist for bringing out this comprehensive report reflecting the progress of production system research under rainfed agro ecosystem. ; Not Available

Not Available ; Sustainable management of natural resources is key for improved agricultural productivity and better livelihoods for farmers in rainfed regions of the country. Over the years, large number of improved technologies like superior varieties, nutrient management, pest control, cropping system etc. were evolved for major rainfed crops like pulses, oilseeds, cotton and nutritious cereals in different agro ecological situations in the country. Application of these technologies resulted in significantly higher yields at research stations across the country. But the actual yields realized by the farmers still remain low and this yield gap is a major concern for the Government of India. There are many reasons for the continued yield gap. However, the most important has been the field level constraints in adopting the best technologies and management practices by the farmers for realizing optimum productivity from a given crop or cropping system, as done at the research stations. It is more so in rainfed regions where the growing environment is quite heterogeneous and the risks are enormous in adopting any new technology which requires higher investments. It is therefore important to critically understand the performance of the improved technologies under farmer's conditions and analyze how best to leverage to farmers strengths and overcome the weaknesses in order to bridge the yield gap as much as possible. The production systems research (PSR) under rainfed agro ecosystems of the NATP attempted to address this issue through a farmer participatory on-farm research mode. Network projects were formulated in all the five production systems on major thrust areas like rainwater management, INM, IPM, on-farm varietal testing, post harvest technology and value addition. As a chairman of the Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP), I have been associated with the NATP project with reviewing, approval and monitoring of the sub projects under rainfed agro ecosystem between 1999 to 2004. This was a major effort of on-farm research in more than 200 districts involving nearly 8000 farmers. As a departure from the normal crop demonstrations, these experiments were located in specially identified target districts which have fairly large area under a given production system but lag behind in productivity. This participatory research model was fairly successful in generating useful data on farmers micro farming situations which truly reflects the strength of the technology and its application domain. In addition to identifying and validating nearly 48 technologies in different production systems, the sub projects have also resulted in transferable technologies in the area of post harvest technology and value addition which can be taken up by private entrepreneurs. The project tested successfully a new model of inter institutional research with in built monitoring mechanism which should be main streamed into the research system of the NARS. This completion report eloquently captures all the major events in the implementation of the project covering the project development processes, salient achievements, technology transfer, linkages and impact. I am sure this report will be quite useful to all the stakeholders of rainfed agro ecosystem research in the NARS. I wish to acknowledge the excellent co-operation and efforts of the all my colleagues in the scientific advisory panel (SAP) who played a key role in identification and formulation of relevant research projects in the priority domains. Some of them who were associated for most part of the project implementation and made substantial contribution include Drs.N.G.P.Rao,I.C.Mahapatra, B.K.Soni, N.N.Goswami, S.Bislaiah, R.K.Gupta and S.N.Puri. The agro ecosystem Directors, Dr.Y.S.Ramakrishna, the present Director and Dr.H.P.Singh, the former Director of CRIDA, efficiently implemented the projects at the AED level. Dr.B.Venkateswarlu, Principal Production System Scientist (PPSS) did an excellent job in coordinating the work, organizing the SAP meetings and documentation, which was responsible for good recognition and appreciation of the AED Rainfed by PIU, NATP. Dr.K.P.R.Vittal, former PPSS, played immense role in the project development process by preparing the base documents and putting in place the functional network for different sub projects. I wish to specially acknowledge the cooperation of all the participating farmers and project scientists who contributed to the success of this major project in evaluating, validating and refining various technologies to improve the productivity and sustainability of this stressed ecosystem. I wish to acknowledge and congratulate all those involved in the successful implementation of this unique project. ; Not Available

Not Available ; Agriculture, animal husbandry and fisheries provide maximum employment in the primary sector and form the major source of income and livelihood security of about 70 percent of the population in India. After the introduction of the liberalisation policy and giving thrust for the adoption of improved technologies, there has been a spectacular increase in production in all these segments and the country has witnessed a rapid structural change. Massive adoption of scientific inventions and technological interventions witnessed revolutionary changes in all sectors of development and quality of life of people. Achieving self-sufficiency on food front has been one of the finest Indian successes of the post independence era. The food grain production increased four times (from 50.8 million tonnes during 1950-51 to 198.7 million tonnes during 2000-01) since independence as compared to the three-fold increase in population. Further significant advances have also been made in the production of milk, fish, oilseeds, fruits and vegetables. In fisheries, the country has ushered in the blue revolution with gross production reaching 5.6 million metric tonnes offish and edible invertebrates during 2000- 2001. India is the second largest Asian country in terms of culture fisheries and the third largest in terms of capture fisheries (NAAS, 2001). Due to concerted efforts on strategic research and production technology in oilseeds sector, the country witnessed yellow revolution with the production reaching 25 million tonnes per annum. This was possible as a result of strong agricultural research support provided by the National Agricultural Research System (NARS). ; Not Available

Agricultural ecosystems produce food, fiber, and nonmarketed ecosystem services (ES). Agriculture also typically involves high negative external costs associated with, for example, fossil fuel use. We estimated, via fieldscale ecological monitoring and economic value-transfer methods, the market and nonmarket ES value of a combined food and energy (CFE) agro-ecosystem that simultaneously produces food, fodder, and bioenergy. Such novel CFE agro-ecosystems can provide a significantly increased net crop, energy, and nonmarketed ES compared with conventional agriculture, and require markedly less fossil-based inputs. Extrapolated to the European scale, the value of nonmarket ES from the CFE system exceeds current European farm subsidy payments. Such integrated food and bioenergy systems can thus provide environmental value for money for European Union farming and nonfarming communities.

Agricultural ecosystems produce food, fiber, and nonmarketed ecosystem services (ES). Agriculture also typically involves high negative external costs associated with, for example, fossil fuel use. We estimated, via fieldscale ecological monitoring and economic value-transfer methods, the market and nonmarket ES value of a combined food and energy (CFE) agro-ecosystem that simultaneously produces food, fodder, and bioenergy. Such novel CFE agro-ecosystems can provide a significantly increased net crop, energy, and nonmarketed ES compared with conventional agriculture, and require markedly less fossil-based inputs. Extrapolated to the European scale, the value of nonmarket ES from the CFE system exceeds current European farm subsidy payments. Such integrated food and bioenergy systems can thus provide environmental value for money for European Union farming and nonfarming communities.

Abstract. The products and the variety of direct and indirect benefits that humans receive from nature and the various ecosystems (agricultural, forest, grass, mountain, river, marine, etc.) are commonly known as ecosystem services. Agricultural ecosystems of different types and their specific "agro-ecosystem" services are among the most widespread in the world. In recent years increasing attention is given to the system of ("good") governance as a key to achieving public, collective, corporate, and private goals in relation to conservation and improvement of (agro)ecosystem services. Nevertheless, in Bulgaria, like in many other countries, there are few studies on the amount and importance of agro-ecosystem services, and the specific mechanisms, modes, factors, and efficiency of their management. This article tries to fill the gap and presents the results of a large-scale study on the structure and governance of diverse ecosystem services of Bulgarian farms. Firstly, it identifies the type, amount, and importance of various (provisional, economic, recreational, aesthetic, cultural, educational, supporting, water and air purification, biodiversity preservation, climate regulation, etc.) ecosystem services maintained and "produced" by the Bulgarian farms of different juridical type, size, specialization, and location. The study has found out that country's farms provide a great number of essential ecosystem services among which provisioning food and feed, and conservation of elements of the natural environment prevail. Secondly, it identifies and assesses the efficiency and complementarities of specific modes and mechanisms of governance of ecosystem services used by the Bulgarian farms. The study had found out that a great variety of private, market, collective, public and hybrid modes of governance of farm activity related to agroecosystem services are applied. There is significant differentiation of employed managerial forms depending on the type of ecosystem services and the specialization of agricultural holdings. Furthermore, the management of agroecosystem services is associated with a considerable increase in the production and transaction costs of participating farms as well as big socio-economic and environmental effects for agricultural holdings and other parties. The factors that mostly stimulate the activity of Bulgarian agricultural producers for protection of (agro)ecosystems and their services are participation in public support programs, access to farmers' advice, professional training, available information, and innovation, received direct subsidies from EU and national government, personal conviction and satisfaction, positive experience of others, long-term and immediate benefits for the farm, and integration with suppliers, buyers, and processors. The suggested holistic and interdisciplinary framework for analyzing the system of management of agro-ecosystem services is to be further extended and improved, and more widely and periodically applied in the future. The later requires systematic in-depth multidisciplinary research in this new area, as well as the collection of original micro- and macro information on ecosystem survives, and forms, efficiency, and factors of their management. The accuracy of analyzes is to be improved by increasing representativeness through enlarging the number of surveyed farms and related agents, applying statistical methods, special "training" of participants, etc. as well as improving the official system for collecting agricultural, agro-economic, and agri-environmental information in the country.Keywords. Ecosystems, Services, Governance, Efficiency, Agriculture, Farms, Bulgaria.JEL. Q10, O31, O33, Q01, Q16, Q18.

Este artículo hace una primera aproximación a los aportes desde la agroecología a un agro ecosistema integralmente sano, y cuestiona la bondad de las agriculturas de precisión y convencional en este sentido. Para el autor, un agro ecosistema integralmente sano es aquel simultáneamente saludable para los ecosistemas que lo sustentan, y para todos los seres e instituciones involucrados en la cadena de agregación de valor hasta el consumidor final y la cadena de retorno de residuos a los resumideros ecos sistémicos. Saludable en todas las dimensiones de la vida: territorial, ecológica, bio-psico-neuro-emocional, espiritual, cultural, tecnológica, social, política y económica. Abstract This article is a first approach to the contributions from agro ecology agro ecosystem to fully healthy, and questions the goodness of precision agriculture and conventional in this regard. For the author, a fully healthy agro ecosystem simultaneously is that healthy ecosystems that sustain it, and for all people and institutions involved in the chain of added value to the consumer and the chain of return of waste to drains ecosystem . Healthy in all aspects of life: territorial, environmental, bio-psycho-neuro-emotional, spiritual, cultural, technological, social, political and economic.

This article is a first approach to the contributions from agro ecology agro ecosystem to fully healthy, and questions the goodness of precision agriculture and conventional in this regard. For the author, a fully healthy agro ecosystem simultaneously is that healthy ecosystems that sustain it, and for all people and institutions involved in the chain of added value to the consumer and the chain of return of waste to drains ecosystem . Healthy in all aspects of life: territorial, environmental, bio-psycho-neuro-emotional, spiritual, cultural, technological, social, political and economic.Keywords: Adaptation, Regeneration, Agroecosystem. ; Este artículo hace una primera aproximación a los aportes desde la agroecología a un agro ecosistema integralmente sano, y cuestiona la bondad de las agriculturas de precisión y convencional en este sentido. Para el autor, un agro ecosistema integralmente sano es aquel simultáneamente saludable para los ecosistemas que lo sustentan, y para todos los seres e instituciones involucrados en la cadena de agregación de valor hasta el consumidor final y la cadena de retorno de residuos a los resumideros ecos sistémicos. Saludable en todas las dimensiones de la vida: territorial, ecológica, bio-psico-neuro-emocional, espiritual, cultural, tecnológica, social, política y económica.Palabras claves: Adaptación, Regeneración, Agroecosistema.