Should we consider integrated crop–livestock systems for ecosystem services, carbon sequestration, and agricultural resilience to climate change?

Abstract

AbstractContemporary agricultural systems can be generalized as highly specialized operations that are fueled by mechanization; supplied with external nutrients to maximize production; crops protected by petrochemicals to fight against weed, disease, and insect pressures; and livestock protected by therapeutics to ward off virus and bacterial infections when managed in confinement. Such specialized systems have led to low levels of diversity, elevated environmental risks from contamination, loss of soil organic matter, ecological instability, and limited adaptability to climate change. More diversified farming systems are possible, but research required to characterize them in a holistic manner as an alternative to contemporary, specialized systems remains challenging to fund and sustain over time, primarily because they require more labor, management skills, and accessible markets to achieve additional ecological, environmental, and social goals. We share some perspectives as to (1) how specialized systems became the norm and (2) what changes could be made to reverse some ecological risks and environmental declines associated with specialization, acknowledging there is no panacea. Strong evidence exists for perennial forages to restore soil organic carbon (C) and nitrogen, but system‐level analyses of the net balance in greenhouse gas emissions remain to be characterized in the myriad of potential integrated crop–livestock systems that might be deployed across the diversity of edaphic, environmental, and socio‐economic conditions. We suggest there are abundant opportunities for more sustainable agricultural production to sequester soil organic C, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and develop more climate‐resilient agricultural systems that will be needed in a future dominated by climate change issues.