Sustainable Character of Agroproductive Nodes in Intermontane Arid Territories of Sonora, Mexico †
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Location of the Study Area and Observation Site
2.2. Elements of the Agroproductive Node and Its Identification
- (a)
- Identify the vulnerable points of the process, vulnerability traits, importance value, and numerical value;
- (b)
- Establish the risks and respective indicators;
- (c)
- For both cases, assign a value from 0 to 1, defined by the operator of the agroproductive node;
- (d)
- Identify the value of the threat (VT) using Equation (1):
- Low or tolerable: between 0 and 5. The threat is tolerable. Change 10% of the processes that seem fragile or unsuitable for the development of the activity;
- Medium or latent: between >5 and <10. The threat is latent. Identify and assess possible activities to be carried out that are complementary to the main activity of the node in 50% of these;
- High or imminent: >10. The threat is imminent. The main activity requires a transformation in more than 50% of its processes.
2.3. Selection Criteria of the Elements or Activities of the Agroproductive Node
- That there are vulnerable processes or potential risks that represent a threat to the existence of the node;
- That the options for the use of natural resources generate sustainable activity;
- That the results are products or services within a sustainable category;
- That they contribute to the development and food security of the community and/or region with minimal environmental impact.
2.4. Definition of the Scale of Ecotechnological and Sustainable Adoption
3. Results
3.1. Analysis of the Agroproductive Process of the Original Activity
3.2. Identification of Risk Indicators and Threat Quantification
3.3. Conditioning Criteria for the Adoption of Potential Productive Activities
3.4. Alternatives for the Transition of Node of Study
4. Discussions
5. Conclusions
- (a)
- Arid tourism values spaces that are direct to the environment and that are focused on the appreciation of nature, without population overcrowding. It promotes inner peace, as well as the use of xeric landscapes for therapeutic walking and connecting with the biology of the desert;
- (b)
- The purpose of the buffer areas to protect wildlife is to conserve undisturbed spaces on the site for the maintenance of migratory and local species, or both, such as vertebrates and other native organisms;
- (c)
- The use of rescue grazing provides a healthy soil cover, without pressure from trampling or soil erosion. This generates protein from the rescue of livestock, which suffer the consequences of prolonged droughts in the region and the low availability of forage.
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Instituto Nacional de Estadístia y Geografía. Available online: https://www.inegi.org.mx/contenidos/saladeprensa/boletines/2021/pibe/PIBEntFed2020.pdf (accessed on 6 January 2022).
- Acebes, P.; Iglesias-González, Z.; Muñoz-Galvez, F.J. Do Traditional Livestock Systems Fit into Contemporary Landscapes? Integrating Social Perceptions and Values on Landscape Change. Agriculture 2021, 11, 1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molina Benavides, R.A.; Campos Gaona, R.; Sánchez Guerrero, H.; Giraldo Patiño, L.; Atzori, A.S. Sustainable Feedbacks of Colombian Paramos Involving Livestock, Agricultural Activities, and Sustainable Development Goals of the Agenda 2030. Systems 2019, 7, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Banson, K.E.; Nguyen, N.C.; Sun, D.; Asare, D.K.; Sowah Kodia, S.; Afful, I.; Leigh, J. Strategic Management for Systems Archetypes in the Piggery Industry of Ghana—A Systems Thinking Perspective. Systems 2018, 6, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cowan, L.; Wright, V. An Approach for Analyzing the Vulnerability of Small Family Businesses. Systems 2016, 4, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shongwe, M.I.; Bezuidenhout, C.N.; Sibomana, M.S.; Workneh, T.S.; Bodhanya, S.; Dlamini, V.V. Developing a Systematic Diagnostic Model for Integrated Agricultural Supply and Processing Systems. Systems 2019, 7, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Balanay, R.; Halog, A. A Review of Reductionist versus Systems Perspectives towards ‘Doing the Right Strategies Right’ for Circular Economy Implementation. Systems 2021, 9, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Byomkesh Talukder, B.; Blay-Palmer, A.; Gary, W.; van Loon, G.W.; Hipel, K.W. Towards complexity of agricultural sustainability assessment: Main issues and concerns. Environ. Sustain. Indic. 2020, 6, 10038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turner, B.L.; Goodman, M.; Machen, R.; Mathis, C.; Rhoades, R.; Dunn, B. Results of Beer Game Trials Played by Natural Resource Managers Versus Students: Does Age Influence Ordering Decisions? Systems 2020, 8, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malec, K.; Gebeltová, Z.; Mansoor, M.; Appiah-Kubi, S.N.K.; Sirohi, J.; Maitah, K.; Phiri, J.; Pańka, D.; Prus, P.; Smutka, L.; et al. Water Management of Czech Crop Production in 1961–2019. Agriculture 2022, 12, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maxwell, C.M.; Langarudi, S.P.; Fernald, A.G. Simulating a Watershed-Scale Strategy to Mitigate Drought, Flooding, and Sediment Transport in Drylands. Systems 2019, 7, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cheng, L.; Zou, W.; Duan, K. The Influence of New Agricultural Business Entities on the Economic Welfare of Farmer’s Families. Agriculture 2021, 11, 880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jayaraman, S.; Dang, Y.P.; Naorem, A.; Page, K.L.; Dalal, R.C. Conservation Agriculture as a System to Enhance Ecosystem Services. Agriculture 2021, 11, 718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramírez-Orellana, A.; Ruiz-Palomo, D.; Rojo-Ramírez, A.; Burgos-Burgos, J.E. The Ecuadorian Banana Farms Managers’ Perceptions: Innovation as a Driver of Environmental Sustainability Practices. Agriculture 2021, 11, 213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Armenia, S.; Pompei, A.; Castaño Barreto, A.C.; Atzori, A.S.; Fonseca, J.M. The Rural-Urban Food Systems’ Links with the Agenda 2030: From FAO Guidelines on Food Supply and Distribution Systems to a Dairy Sector Application in the Area of Bogota. Systems 2019, 7, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mahamud, M.A.; Saad, N.A.; Zainal Abidin, R.; Yusof, M.F.; Zakaria, N.A.; Mohd Amiruddin Arumugam, M.A.R.; Mat Desa, S.; Md. Noh, M.N. Determination of Cover and Land Management Factors for Soil Loss Prediction in Cameron Highlands, Malaysia. Agriculture 2022, 12, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kurdyś-Kujawska, A.; Sompolska-Rzechuła, A.; Pawłowska-Tyszko, J.; Soliwoda, M. Crop Insurance, Land Productivity and the Environment: A Way forward to a Better Understanding. Agriculture 2021, 11, 1108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Serrano, J.; Shahidian, S.; Machado, E.; Paniagua, L.L.; Carreira, E.; Moral, F.; Pereira, A.; de Carvalho, M. Floristic Composition: Dynamic Biodiversity Indicator of Tree Canopy Effect on Dryland and Improved Mediterranean Pastures. Agriculture 2021, 11, 1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Score 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Process versatility | Completely rigid | Rigid in some parts | Rigid but open to change | Completely innovative and open to change |
Water requirement | More than 24 h | Between 12 and 24 h | One hour a day | Rarely, once a month |
Resilience in natural resources involved | Nil | Low resilience in all | Partial resilience | Full resilience |
Consumption dynamism | Consumed more than twice per week | Consumed more than twice per season | Consumed twice per season of the year | In one season of the year |
Contribution to the ecosystem, economy, or food security | Does not offer immediate contribution | Only to the ecosystem | To the ecosystem and flow in the local economy | Total contribution |
Environmental compatibility | Not compatible | Moderate | High | Very high |
Process Vulnerability | Vulnerability Trait | Importance Value | Assigned Value * |
---|---|---|---|
Planting | The seed loses its germinative capacity | High | 0.85 |
Irrigation | Water is not available due to lack of electricity | Very high | 0.95 |
Growth—Development | Lack of water/nutrients | High | 0.85 |
Cut—baled | Machinery in bad condition or lack of fuel | Middle | 0.50 |
Storage | Putrefaction or combustion | Middle–high | 0.5–0.85 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mojica-Zárate, H.T. Sustainable Character of Agroproductive Nodes in Intermontane Arid Territories of Sonora, Mexico. Chem. Proc. 2022, 10, 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/IOCAG2022-12346
Mojica-Zárate HT. Sustainable Character of Agroproductive Nodes in Intermontane Arid Territories of Sonora, Mexico. Chemistry Proceedings. 2022; 10(1):77. https://doi.org/10.3390/IOCAG2022-12346
Chicago/Turabian StyleMojica-Zárate, Héctor Tecumshé. 2022. "Sustainable Character of Agroproductive Nodes in Intermontane Arid Territories of Sonora, Mexico" Chemistry Proceedings 10, no. 1: 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/IOCAG2022-12346
APA StyleMojica-Zárate, H. T. (2022). Sustainable Character of Agroproductive Nodes in Intermontane Arid Territories of Sonora, Mexico. Chemistry Proceedings, 10(1), 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/IOCAG2022-12346