The Impact of Using Co-Compost on Resource Management and Resilience of Smallholder Agriculture in South India

被引:1
作者
Fendel, Veronika [1 ]
Kranert, Martin [1 ]
Maurer, Claudia [1 ]
Garces-Sanchez, Gabriela [1 ]
Huang, Jingjing [1 ]
Ramakrishna, Girija [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Stuttgart, Inst Sanit Engn Water Qual & Solid Waste Manageme, Chair Waste Management & Emiss, Bandtale 2, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany
[2] Indian Inst Sci, Bengaluru 560012, Karnataka, India
关键词
co-compost; co-recycling concepts; farmer perspectives; resilience; resource management; smallholder agriculture; South India; sustainable development goals; SOLID-WASTE; NUTRIENT; CYCLES; URBAN; WATER;
D O I
10.3390/environments9110143
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Agriculture is the main source of income in India, with most farmers being smallholders and facing multiple challenges, such as climate change and land degradation. For the sustainable implementation of alternative circular approaches, it is important that agriculture benefits. To assess this, the impact of using co-compost (organic waste and black water consisting of feces and urine) was evaluated through surveys of 120 smallholder farmers in two case studies in South India. All 149 questions related to the overarching research question: what is the impact of using co-compost on closing loops in smallholder agriculture in terms of resource management and resilience. Secondary smallholder resources were found to be well managed and local networks and economies proved to be particularly effective in pandemics, reinforcing the potential for nutrient sources from urban areas. For most farmers, using co-compost improved yields (90%), soil (80%), plant health (93%) and, consequently, profits (67%), as well as water management (53%). Water management was significantly less of a problem for co-compost users (15%) than non-users (42%). In addition, the users of co-compost were able to save resources. Chemical fertilizer use was significantly reduced from 1.42 +/- 2.1 to 0.9 +/- 1.35 t (acre center dot year)(-1), with total savings ranging from 37 to 44%. Overall, 67% were able to reduce chemical fertilizer use and 25% were able to reduce chemical spray use. Additionally, 53% reduced water consumption by 30.3% +/- 19.92%. The visible benefits could motivate others to try co-composting. The reservations of non-users were due to personal or societal aspects (25%). In addition, the desire of farmers to convert to organic farming and try alternative farming methods, such as using smart technologies, vermicomposting or co-compost, was high (43%) and was positively influenced by the profitable use of alternative circular concepts. Information dissemination was mainly promoted by advertising (60%) and demonstrations (27%), which influenced openness to alternative circular concepts and products. In conclusion, co-composting and co-recycling approaches have a positive impact on the resource management and resilience of smallholder agriculture and thus, contribute to achieving sustainability goals.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]  
Ahmed M.A.M., 2021, ALEXANDRIA SCI EXCH, V42, P523, DOI [10.21608/asejaiqjsae.2021.180037, DOI 10.21608/ASEJAIQJSAE.2021.180037]
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2006, Quantitative Forschung
[3]  
Ein Praxiskurs Quantitative Research, a Practical Course
[4]   Climate change and agriculture in South Asia: adaptation options in smallholder production systems [J].
Aryal, Jeetendra Prakash ;
Sapkota, Tek B. ;
Khurana, Ritika ;
Khatri-Chhetri, Arun ;
Rahut, Dil Bahadur ;
Jat, M. L. .
ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 22 (06) :5045-5075
[5]  
Assembly G., 2015, Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development
[6]   The Future of Smallholder Farming in India: Some Sustainability Considerations [J].
Bisht, Ishwari Singh ;
Rana, Jai Chand ;
Ahlawat, Sudhir Pal .
SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 12 (09)
[7]   An assessment of the global impact of 21st century land use change on soil erosion [J].
Borrelli, Pasquale ;
Robinson, David A. ;
Fleischer, Larissa R. ;
Lugato, Emanuele ;
Ballabio, Cristiano ;
Alewell, Christine ;
Meusburger, Katrin ;
Modugno, Sirio ;
Schuett, Brigitta ;
Ferro, Vito ;
Bagarello, Vincenzo ;
Van Oost, Kristof ;
Montanarella, Luca ;
Panagos, Panos .
NATURE COMMUNICATIONS, 2017, 8
[8]   Water reuse for irrigation in Jordan: Perceptions of water quality among farmers [J].
Carr, Gemma ;
Potter, Robert B. ;
Nortcliff, Stephen .
AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 2011, 98 (05) :847-854
[9]   Impacts of a national lockdown on smallholder farmers' income and food security: Empirical evidence from two states in India [J].
Ceballos, Francisco ;
Kannan, Samyuktha ;
Kramer, Berber .
WORLD DEVELOPMENT, 2020, 136
[10]   Reflections on farmers' social networks: a means for sustainable agricultural development? [J].
Chaudhuri, Sriroop ;
Roy, Mimi ;
McDonald, Louis M. ;
Emendack, Yves .
ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY, 2021, 23 (03) :2973-3008