The livestock sector serves as a foremost source of revenue for rural people, particularly in many developing countries. Among the livestock species, sheep and goats are the main source of livelihood for rural people in Ethiopia; they can quickly multiply, resilient and are easily convertible to cash to meet financial needs of the rural producers. The multiple contributions of sheep and goat and other livestock to rural farmers are however being challenged by climate change and variability. Farmers are responding to the impacts of climate change by adopting different mechanisms, where choices are largely dependent on many factors. This study, therefore, aims to analyze the determinants of choices of adaptation practices to climate change that causes scarcity of feed, heat stress, shortage of water and pasture on sheep and goat production. The study used 318 sample households drawn from potential livestock producing districts representing 3 agro-ecological settings. Data was analyzed using simple descriptive statistical tools, a multivariate probit model and Ordinary Least Squares (OLS). Most of the respondents (98.6 %) noted that climate is changing. Respondents’ perception is that climate change is expressed through increased temperature (88 %) and decline in rainfall (73 %) over the last 10 years. The most commonly used adaptation strategy was marketing during forage shock (96.5 %), followed by home feeding (89.6 %). The estimation from the multivariate probit model showed that access to information, farming experience, number of households in one village, distance to main market, income of household, and agro-ecological settings influenced farmers’ adaptation choices to climate change. Furthermore, OLS revealed that the adaptation strategies had positive influence on the household income.

This paper explores the sustainable intensification possibilities facing smallholder farmers in Ethiopia. We examine the internal consistency of jointly achieving “sustainable” “intensification” by exploring the factors that lead to complementarity or tradeoffs in the outcomes. A cross-sectional survey of farms was examined in multiple regions of Ethiopia’s Highlands. The results show that some farmers can achieve both sustainability and intensification, while many do not, or cannot achieve both at the same time. We found that some actions have a common impact on both sustainability and intensification, while other factors only affect one outcome. Access to agricultural loans and farm mechanization significantly increases the likelihood of succeeding in sustainable intensification. Access to land will be critical for agricultural sustainability while access to farming information and technical services will drive agricultural intensification. Overall, opportunities to improve both sustainability and intensification are weak, but the opportunity to improve one without sacrificing the other are realistic. The results contribute to the ongoing debate on sustainable intensification and help policy makers explore alternatives for managing different intensification and sustainability scenarios to achieve agricultural development goals.

This study proposes the use of marginal abatement cost curves to calculate environmental damages of agricultural systems in China's Loess Plateau. Total system costs and revenues, management characteristics and pollution attributes are imputed into a directional output distance function, which is then used to determine shadow prices and abatement cost curves for soil and nitrogen loss. Marginal abatement costs curves are an effective way to compare economic and conservation tradeoffs when field-specific data are scarce. The results show that sustainable agricultural practices can balance soil conservation and agricultural production; land need not be retired, as is current policy.

India, the world’s leading rice exporter, banned the export of non-Basmati white rice, accounting for 25% of its total exports (or 10% of the global rice trade). The ban aims to ensure availability to domestic Indian consumers and reduce domestic market prices, impacting global rice market accessibility, consumers, and producers across twelve regions. The study utilized the global simulation model (GSIM) to analyze the effects of trade restrictions on industries. The model uses national product differentiation to assess trade policy changes at global, regional, or national scales. It examined importer and exporter effects on trade values, tariff revenues, exporter surplus, and importer surplus. It found that India’s Voluntary Export Restraint (VER) ban on non-Basmati rice resulted in a higher local price and a negative global net welfare impact of USD 1.7 billion. The losses decreased to USD 1.4 billion when importing countries responded by reducing rice import tariffs by 25% and USD 1.1 billion when importing countries reduced tariffs by 75%. Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, North Africa, and the Gulf Cooperation Council regions were most affected. The study also found minimal impact on consumer surplus in India due to inelastic rice demand.