Intercropping—Evaluating the Advantages to Broadacre Systems

Uttam Khanal, Kerry J. Stott, Roger Armstrong, James G. Nuttall, Frank Henry, Brendan P. Christy, Meredith Mitchell, Penny A. Riffkin, Ashley J. Wallace, Malcolm McCaskill, Thabo Thayalakumaran and Garry J. O’Leary
Additional contact information
Uttam Khanal: Agriculture Victoria, 110 Natimuk Road, Horsham, VIC 3400, Australia
Kerry J. Stott: Agriculture Victoria, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia
Roger Armstrong: Agriculture Victoria, 110 Natimuk Road, Horsham, VIC 3400, Australia
James G. Nuttall: Agriculture Victoria, 110 Natimuk Road, Horsham, VIC 3400, Australia
Frank Henry: Agriculture Victoria, 915 Mt Napier Road, Hamilton, VIC 3300, Australia
Brendan P. Christy: Agriculture Victoria, 124 Chiltern Valley Road, Rutherglen, VIC 3685, Australia
Meredith Mitchell: Agriculture Victoria, 124 Chiltern Valley Road, Rutherglen, VIC 3685, Australia
Penny A. Riffkin: Agriculture Victoria, 915 Mt Napier Road, Hamilton, VIC 3300, Australia
Ashley J. Wallace: Agriculture Victoria, 110 Natimuk Road, Horsham, VIC 3400, Australia
Malcolm McCaskill: Agriculture Victoria, 915 Mt Napier Road, Hamilton, VIC 3300, Australia
Thabo Thayalakumaran: Agriculture Victoria, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia
Garry J. O’Leary: Agriculture Victoria, 110 Natimuk Road, Horsham, VIC 3400, Australia

Agriculture, 2021, vol. 11, issue 5, 1-20

Abstract: Intercropping is considered by its advocates to be a sustainable, environmentally sound, and economically advantageous cropping system. Intercropping systems are complex, with non-uniform competition between the component species within the cropping cycle, typically leading to unequal relative yields making evaluation difficult. This paper is a review of the main existing metrics used in the scientific literature to assess intercropping systems. Their strengths and limitations are discussed. Robust metrics for characterising intercropping systems are proposed. A major limitation is that current metrics assume the same management level between intercropping and monocropping systems and do not consider differences in costs of production. Another drawback is that they assume the component crops in the mixture are of equal value. Moreover, in employing metrics, many studies have considered direct and private costs and benefits only, ignoring indirect and social costs and benefits of intercropping systems per se. Furthermore, production risk and growers’ risk preferences were often overlooked. In evaluating intercropping advantage using data from field trials, four metrics are recommended that collectively take into account all important differences in private costs and benefits between intercropping and monocropping systems, specifically the Land Equivalent Ratio, Yield Ratio, Value Ratio and Net Gross Margin.

Keywords: sustainable agriculture; intercropping metrics; land equivalent ratio; broadacre agriculture (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/5/453/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/5/453/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:5:p:453-:d:556180

Access Statistics for this article

Agriculture is currently edited by Ms. Leda Xuan

More articles in Agriculture from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().