Abstract
AbstractStudies show that cereal diversity positively affects mean yields, suggesting increased crop diversity as a means of increasing production (Di Falco and Chavas 2009, Baumgärtner and Quaas 2010). In practice though, agricultural development has relied on nondiverse systems. Using the Ethiopian Rural Household Survey panel, we revisit this paradox and disentangle the effects of agroecological zones and composition of crop diversity. We find a positive effect of greater cereal diversity on cereal production, but mostly in specific agroecological zones and for households who diversify away from a particular low-productivity crop: teff. These results indicate that the scope of cereal diversity to drive increases in output may be limited. Similar to recent studies of biodiversity—ecosystem function relationships (e.g. Jochum et al. 2020), the results suggest that the composition of diverse systems can be more important than the measured diversity itself. In the case of cereal crops in Ethiopia, differences in the yields of particular cereals in the crop mix explain the diversity effect, rather than diversity alone. Since some combinations of crops add to productivity but others do not, productivity-related crop choice may not guarantee in situ conservation of crop diversity on its own. Alternative conservation solutions may well be needed for that.
Highlights
The effect of crop diversity on agricultural production has been shown to be positive in a variety of contexts via increased mean and often reduced variability of yields (e.g. Di Falco et al 2010; Di Falco and Chavas 2006)
We find a positive effect of greater cereal diversity on cereal production, but mostly in specific agroecological zones and for households who diversify away from a particular low-productivity crop: teff
Since some combinations of crops add to productivity but others do not, productivity-related crop choice may not guarantee in situ conservation of crop diversity on its own
Summary
The effect of crop diversity on agricultural production has been shown to be positive in a variety of contexts via increased mean and often reduced variability of yields (e.g. Di Falco et al 2010; Di Falco and Chavas 2006). A number of microeconomic studies seem to suggest a ‘win-win-win’ situation in the form of increased productivity, reduced volatility of output, and greater in situ conservation (Di Falco and Perrings 2003; Di Falco and Chavas 2006; Di Falco et al 2007). These findings, contrast sharply with historical trends in agricultural development, which appear to be driven by increasingly mechanized, specialized, and input-intensive agriculture. This implies that alternatives to the current model have to be sought
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
