A presentation made at the WCCA 2011 event in Brisbane, Australia.

1. Scope for sustainability:
Do castor beans and the biodiesel industry offer
family farmers a sustainable development
opportunity in Brazil?
Madeleine Florin, Gerrie van de Ven, Martin van Ittersum
Plant Production Systems group

2. Brazilian national biodiesel programme
 Blending targets
 5% by 2012
 Social fuel seal
 Fraction of expenditure on family
farmers (feedstock, extension, seeds)
 Regional development
 Targeting the semi-arid
 Promoting castor beans
for family farmers

3. Family farming in Montes Claros
 Transition zone between Caatinga and Cerrado
 1035 mm year-1 concentrated during 3-4 months
 Dominant farming system is extensive cattle
ranching
 Pasture
 Fodder crops
 Food crops
 Dairy cattle for cheese production
 Meat production

4. The situation unfolding
 Few family farmers participating and the dominant
biodiesel feedstock is soy beans
 Suitability of castor beans
 Trust between industry and farmers
 Incentives
What is the scope for sustainable cultivation of
castor beans by family farmers and can this be
explained by:
o Current productivity?
o Alternative productivity?
o Alternative farm-level management decisions?

5. Research question:
What is the scope for sustainable
cultivation of castor beans by family
farmers and can this be explained by:
o current productivity
o alternative productivity
o alternative management decisions
taken at the farm level?

6. Indicator selection framework
Productivity Acceptability Security Protection Viability
Principles
- Not endanger - Contribute to - Increase the - Maintain or - Contribute to
the food economic stability of increase carbon economic
production and development of smallholder or sinks in development of
other local smallholder or family farmers vegetation and smallholder or
biomass family farmers livelihood soil family farmers
applications - Contribute to the - Retain or
social justice of improve the soil
smallholder or and soil quality
family farmers - Retain or
Criteria
improve the water
quantity and
quality
- Maintain or
increase
biodiversity
- Mitigate
greenhouse gas
emissions
(compared with
fossil fuels)

7. Indicator selection framework
Sustainability criteria Selected indicators
Biofuel production should contribute to - Farm income (R$ ha-1; R$
economic development of family household-1)
farmers
Biofuel production should increase the - Simpson’s diversity index
stability of family farmer livelihood - Labour inputs and labour use
efficiency (days year-1; R$ day -1)
- Purchased inputs and purchased
input use efficiency (R$ year-1; R$
R$-1)
Biofuel production should retain or - Nitrogen balance (kg ha-1; kg farm-
improve the soil and soil fertility 1)

8. Research question:
What is the scope for sustainable
cultivation of castor beans by family
farmers and can this be explained by:
o current productivity
o alternative productivity
o alternative management decisions
taken at the farm level?

9. Farm survey
 Visit 20 farms in
September 2010
 Current activities and
areas
 Economic
characteristics
 Inputs and outputs by
activity

10. Variation in pasture productivity
Variation in crop productivity (for fodder)
Maize yield: 340 – 4080 kg ha-1
Milk yields: 436 – 4169 l cow-1 year-1

11. 4 focus farms – variation of maize and milk
Farm Farm areas (ha) Herd Household size/
yields size/number of
milking cows
labour
(no. of people)
‘1’ Whole farm: 46 30/7 2/2
- Maize quartile 1 Maize/beans: 2.0
(340 kg ha-1) Sugarcane: 1.5
- Milk quartile 1 Brachiaria pasture: 3.0
(436 l cow-1) Native pasture: 33.5
Native vegetation: 5.0
‘2’ Whole farm: 8.0 34/10 4/2
- Maize quartile 2 Maize/beans: 2.0
(1148 kg ha-1) Sugarcane: 1.0
- Milk quartile 4 Brachiaria pasture: 5.0
(2555 l cow-1) Native pasture: 0.0
Native vegetation: 0.0
‘3’ Whole farm: 96.8 150/5 5/5
- Maize quartile 3 Maize/beans: 2.0
(2550 kg ha-1) Sugarcane: 2.0
- Milk quartile 3 Brachiaria pasture: 58.1
(2268 l cow-1) Native pasture: 0.0
Native vegetation: 33.7
‘4’ Whole farm: 19.9 35/10 2/2
- Maize quartile 4 Maize/beans: 2.0
(4080 kg ha-1) Sugarcane: 0.8
- Milk quartile 2 Brachiaria pasture: 17.1
(1200 l cow-1) Native pasture: 0.0
Native vegetation: 1.0

12. Research question:
What is the scope for sustainable
cultivation of castor beans by family
farmers and can this be explained by:
o current productivity
o alternative productivity
o alternative management decisions
taken at the farm level?

13. Alternative farming system design
Castor bean 1 – 552 kg ha-1
Castor bean 2 – 615 kg ha-1
Castor bean 3 – 1035 kg ha-1
Castor bean 4 – 1051 kg ha-1
4 castor bean yield levels (Diniz Neto et al. 2009)

14. Alternative farming system design
Castor bean area decision 1 Castor bean 1 – 552 kg ha-1
Replace one hectare of area
currently cropped with maize Castor bean 2 – 615 kg ha-1
and beans with castor beans
and beans Castor bean 3 – 1035 kg ha-1
Castor bean 4 – 1051 kg ha-1
Castor bean area decision 2 Castor bean 1
Replace total area currently
cropped with maize and beans Castor bean 2
(two hectares) plus one hectare
currently under pasture with Castor bean 3
castor beans and beans
Castor bean 4
4 castor bean yield levels by 2 castor bean area decisions

15. Alternative farming system design
Animal feeding decision 1 Animal feeding decision 2
Replace all sacrificed feed Sacrifice milk yields due to
production (maize and pasture) losses in fodder production
by purchasing supplementary
fodder (maize equivalent) and
renting an equivalent hectare of
pasture
Castor bean area decision 1 Castor bean 1 – 552 kg ha-1 Castor bean 1
Replace one hectare of area
currently cropped with maize Castor bean 2 – 615 kg ha-1 Castor bean 2
and beans with castor beans
and beans Castor bean 3 – 1035 kg ha-1 Castor bean 3
Castor bean 4 – 1051 kg ha-1 Castor bean 4
Castor bean area decision 2 Castor bean 1 Castor bean 1
Replace total area currently
cropped with maize and beans Castor bean 2 Castor bean 2
(two hectares) plus one hectare
currently under pasture with Castor bean 3 Castor bean 3
castor beans and beans Castor bean 4 Castor bean 4
4 castor bean yield levels by 2 castor bean area by 2 animal feeding decisions

16. Indicator quantification
 4 current + 4 X 16 alternatives
 Input-output calculations
 Survey data
 Supplementary data
 Assumptions involved...
• Nitrogen balance assumptions
• Labour assumptions
• Alternative feeding strategy assumptions
 “Indicator differences” by current and alternatives
 Graphical display

17. Results – current farms
Farm Farm Farm Farm
‘one’ ‘two’ ‘three’ ‘four’
Farm-level indicators
Farm income (R$ household-1) 4017 14791 16369 8554
Farm income (R$ ha-1) 89 1849 171 409
Labour inputs (days year-1) 254 206 330 190
Labour use efficiency (R$ day-1) 16 72 50 45
Purchased inputs (R$ year-1) 1863 1456 4234 1599
Purchased input use efficiency (R$ R$-1) 2 10 4 5
Nitrogen balance (kg farm-1) -529 -476 -2749 -606
Nitrogen balance (kg ha-1) -12 -59 -29 -29
Simpson‟s diversity index 0.41 0.41 0.46 0.50
Field-level indicators
Nitrogen balance for crops (kg ha-1) -10 -18 -39 27
Nitrogen balance for animal/pasture (kg ha-1) -19 -112 -66 -60

18. Results – “indicator differences” by current
farm Mean ∆ income
(R$ year ) -1
Mean ∆ purchased
inputs (R$)
„Farm 1‟ +1143 +237
„Farm 2‟ -8 +628
„Farm 3‟ +209 +950
„Farm 4‟ -423 +1348
 Income
 Productivity of castor beans relative to maize and milk
 Purchased inputs
 Value of current on-farm fodder production

19. Results – “indicator differences” by
alternative farming systems
Mean ∆ purchased inputs (R$)
Castor bean area 1 +365
Castor bean area 2 +1216
Feeding decision 1 +1474
Feeding decision 2 +107
 By castor bean yield levels
 Nitrogen balance and fertilizer inputs important here
 By farm-level decisions
 Purchased inputs different between castor area and
fodder replacement strategies

20. Results – interactions between current and
alternative farming systems
Which combinations of farm,
field- and farm-level decisions are
most favourable?
Area decision 1 and feeding decision 1
Area decision 1 and feeding decision 2
Area decision 2 and feeding decision 1
Area decision 2 and feeding decision 2

21. Discussion and concluding remarks – scope
 Broad implications of the results
 Farm-specific nature of opportunities
• Target low productivity farms
• Alternatives to suit different farms
 Do not ignore the trade-off with milk and fodder
production
 Improving current production activities versus
introducing a new activity

22. Discussion and concluding remarks – future
work...
 Explore more extensive set of alternatives
 Agronomic detail
 Temporal variation
 Integration of animal production with biodiesel
production
 Consider land, labour and cash constraints
 Consider more sustainability indicators
 Capture regional-level issues (industry viability;
hydrology)
 Product-level issues (life cycle analysis)

23. Acknowledgements
 NWO-WOTRO for funding
 Programme partners in Wageningen, Brazil and
Mozambique
www.foodorfuel.org