A Co-Designed Approach to Quantify Diversification Alternatives for Large-Scale Farms in Northern Queensland, Australia

Ms Lipy Adhikari1, Mr. Peter de Voil1, Dr. Fernanda Dreccer2, Dr Daniel Rodriguez1

1University Of Queensland, Gatton, Australia, 2Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), St. Lucia, Australia

Biography:

Lipy Adhikari is a PhD scholar at the University of Queensland, Australia. Her research focuses on co-design modelling exercises aimed at empowering farming communities through informed decisions. Prior to joining her PhD program, Lipy worked for 8 years at an international organization in Nepal, concentrating on topics such as mountain agriculture and value-chain development. Lipy’s contributions extend across various mediums including peer-reviewed journal articles, book chapters, popular articles, and vlogs. Her recent work includes the development of a framework for assessing farm diversification options in broadacre agriculture, published in Agriculture Systems.

Abstract:

In Northern Queensland (NQ), agriculture is dominated by large rangeland cattle-stations, vulnerable to increasing climate extremes and market volatility. Diversification is needed to manage risks, increase farmers’ profits, and deliver sustainability outcomes. However, farm managers lack relevant/actionable information on benefits/trade-offs of alternative options. Large-scale farmers often intensify/specialize to bring economies of scale. This can bring economic risks during global market or policy shifts in addition to ecological imbalances.

We aim to identify/quantify diversification scenarios for large-scale farmers in NQ and discuss benefits/trade-offs in a setting where farm managers are capital rich yet information poor.

A diversification framework, specific for large-scale farms, developed sets of co-designed production scenarios in a participatory modelling exercise using the Agricultural Production Systems Simulator (APSIM) model. Two contrasting case-study farms were selected: a dryland cropping (DC) and a dryland rangeland (DR). Farmers’ interviews guided APSIM for producing quantitative information on proposed production systems. Benefits/trade-offs were quantified across profits, risks, environmental outputs, and skills.

For the DC farm, irrigating legumes and winter crops, in addition to the existing dryland cotton-maize rotation, increased gross margins by ~$1500ha-1year-1 and reduced downside risk by ~25%. Under irrigation, replacing summer-maize with double-cropped winter-maize in rotation with cotton tripled ground cover and reduced soil erosion losses by ~6 tha-1year-1. For the DR farm, the proposed dryland cotton-mungbean system increased downside risk by >60% than the existing forage system; while it reduced erosion by ~3 tha-1year-1.

We conclude that diversification doesn’t necessarily produce favourable outcomes. Participatory modelling exercises can help mitigate potential failures.