Mariana Cristina Rufino

Mariana Cristina Rufino

Auto-generated profile, based on publicly available information

Mariana Cristina Rufino

Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

21Years (2006-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
16 December 2013 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MHMario Herrero
Mario Herrero
PHPetr Havlík
Petr Havlík
HVHugo Valin
Hugo Valin
ANAn Notenbaert
An Notenbaert
MRMariana C. Rufino
Mariana C. Rufino
MOMichael Obersteiner
Michael Obersteiner
We present a unique, biologically consistent, spatially disaggregated global livestock dataset containing information on biomass use, production, feed efficiency, excretion, and greenhouse gas emissions for 28 regions, 8 livestock production systems, 4 animal species (cattle, small ruminants, pigs, and poultry), and 3 livestock products (milk, meat, and eggs). The dataset contains over 50 new global maps containing high-resolution information for understanding the multiple roles (biophysical, economic, social) that livestock can play in different parts of the world. The dataset highlights: (i) feed efficiency as a key driver of productivity, resource use, and greenhouse gas emission intensities, with vast differences between production systems and animal products; (ii) the importance of grasslands as a global resource, supplying almost 50% of biomass for animals while continuing to be at the epicentre of land conversion processes; and (iii) the importance of mixed crop–livestock systems, producing the greater part of animal production (over 60%) in both the developed and the developing world. These data provide critical information for developing targeted, sustainable solutions for the livestock sector and its widely ranging contribution to the global food system. Significance This report is unique in presenting a high-resolution dataset of biomass use, production, feed efficiencies, and greenhouse gas emissions by global livestock. This information will allow the global-change research community in enhancing our understanding of the sustainability of livestock systems and their role in food security, livelihoods and environmental sustainability.

16 May 2011 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
LBLex Bouwman
Lex Bouwman
Kees Klein GoldewijkKees Klein Goldewijk
Kees Klein Goldewijk
KHKlaas W. Van Der Hoek
Klaas W. Van Der Hoek
ABArthur H. W. Beusen
Arthur H. W. Beusen
DVDetlef P. Van Vuuren
Detlef P. Van Vuuren
ESElke Stehfest
Elke Stehfest
Crop-livestock production systems are the largest cause of human alteration of the global nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) cycles. Our comprehensive spatially explicit inventory of N and P budgets in livestock and crop production systems shows that in the beginning of the 20th century, nutrient budgets were either balanced or surpluses were small; between 1900 and 1950, global soil N surplus almost doubled to 36 trillion grams (Tg)·y−1and P surplus increased by a factor of 8 to 2 Tg·y−1. Between 1950 and 2000, the global surplus increased to 138 Tg·y−1of N and 11 Tg·y−1of P. Most surplus N is an environmental loss; surplus P is lost by runoff or accumulates as residual soil P. The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science, and Technology for Development scenario portrays a world with a further increasing global crop (+82% for 2000–2050) and livestock production (+115%); despite rapidly increasing recovery in crop (+35% N recovery and +6% P recovery) and livestock (+35% N and P recovery) production, global nutrient surpluses continue to increase (+23% N and +54% P), and in this period, surpluses also increase in Africa (+49% N and +236% P) and Latin America (+75% N and +120% P). Alternative management of livestock production systems shows that combinations of intensification, better integration of animal manure in crop production, and matching N and P supply to livestock requirements can effectively reduce nutrient flows. A shift in human diets, with poultry or pork replacing beef, can reduce nutrient flows in countries with intensive ruminant production.

1 January 2013 in Animal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MHM. Herrero
M. Herrero
Delia GraceDelia Grace
Delia Grace
JNJ. Njuki
J. Njuki
NJN. Johnson
N. Johnson
DED. Enahoro
D. Enahoro
MRM. C. Rufino
M. C. Rufino
Livestock play a significant role in rural livelihoods and the economies of developing countries. They are providers of income and employment for producers and others working in, sometimes complex, value chains. They are a crucial asset and safety net for the poor, especially for women and pastoralist groups, and they provide an important source of nourishment for billions of rural and urban households. These socio-economic roles and others are increasing in importance as the sector grows because of increasing human populations, incomes and urbanisation rates. To provide these benefits, the sector uses a significant amount of land, water, biomass and other resources and emits a considerable quantity of greenhouse gases. There is concern on how to manage the sector's growth, so that these benefits can be attained at a lower environmental cost. Livestock and environment interactions in developing countries can be both positive and negative. On the one hand, manures from ruminant systems can be a valuable source of nutrients for smallholder crops, whereas in more industrial systems, or where there are large concentrations of animals, they can pollute water sources. On the other hand, ruminant systems in developing countries can be considered relatively resource-use inefficient. Because of the high yield gaps in most of these production systems, increasing the efficiency of the livestock sector through sustainable intensification practices presents a real opportunity where research and development can contribute to provide more sustainable solutions. In order to achieve this, it is necessary that production systems become market-orientated, better regulated in cases, and socially acceptable so that the right mix of incentives exists for the systems to intensify. Managing the required intensification and the shifts to new value chains is also essential to avoid a potential increase in zoonotic, food-borne and other diseases. New diversification options and improved safety nets will also be essential when intensification is not the primary avenue for developing the livestock sector. These processes will need to be supported by agile and effective public and private institutions.

24 February 2014 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PHPetr Havlík
Petr Havlík
HVHugo Valin
Hugo Valin
MHMario Herrero
Mario Herrero
MOMichael Obersteiner
Michael Obersteiner
ESErwin Schmid
Erwin Schmid
ANAn Notenbaert
An Notenbaert
Livestock are responsible for 12% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Sustainable intensification of livestock production systems might become a key climate mitigation technology. However, livestock production systems vary substantially, making the implementation of climate mitigation policies a formidable challenge. Here, we provide results from an economic model using a detailed and high-resolution representation of livestock production systems. We project that by 2030 autonomous transitions toward more efficient systems would decrease emissions by 736 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (MtCO2e⋅y−1), mainly through avoided emissions from the conversion of 162 Mha of natural land. A moderate mitigation policy targeting emissions from both the agricultural and land-use change sectors with a carbon price of US$10 per tCO2e could lead to an abatement of 3,223 MtCO2e⋅y−1. Livestock system transitions would contribute 21% of the total abatement, intra- and interregional relocation of livestock production another 40%, and all other mechanisms would add 39%. A comparable abatement of 3,068 MtCO2e⋅y−1 could be achieved also with a policy targeting only emissions from land-use change. Stringent climate policies might lead to reductions in food availability of up to 200 kcal per capita per day globally. We find that mitigation policies targeting emissions from land-use change are 5 to 10 times more efficient—measured in “total abatement calorie cost”—than policies targeting emissions from livestock only. Thus, fostering transitions toward more productive livestock production systems in combination with climate policies targeting the land-use change appears to be the most efficient lever to deliver desirable climate and food availability outcomes. Significance The livestock sector contributes significantly to global warming through greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. At the same time, livestock is an invaluable source of nutrition and livelihood for millions of poor people. Therefore, climate mitigation policies involving livestock must be designed with extreme care. Here we demonstrate the large mitigation potential inherent in the heterogeneity of livestock production systems. We find that even within existing systems, autonomous transitions from extensive to more productive systems would decrease GHG emissions and improve food availability. Most effective climate policies involving livestock would be those targeting emissions from land-use change. To minimize the economic and social cost, policies should target emissions at their source—on the supply side—rather than on the demand side.

6 July 2011 in Agronomy for Sustainable Development
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
leonard rusinamhodzileonard rusinamhodzi
leonard rusinamhodzi
MCMarc Corbeels
Marc Corbeels
MWMark T. van Wijk
Mark T. van Wijk
MRMariana C. Rufino
Mariana C. Rufino
JNJustice Nyamangara
Justice Nyamangara
KGKenneth E. Giller
Kenneth E. Giller
Conservation agriculture involves reduced tillage, permanent soil cover and crop rotations to enhance soil fertility and to supply food from a dwindling land resource. Recently, conservation agriculture has been promoted in Southern Africa, mainly for maize-based farming systems. However, maize yields under rain-fed conditions are often variable. There is therefore a need to identify factors that influence crop yield under conservation agriculture and rain-fed conditions. Here, we studied maize grain yield data from experiments lasting 5 years and more under rain-fed conditions. We assessed the effect of long-term tillage and residue retention on maize grain yield under contrasting soil textures, nitrogen input and climate. Yield variability was measured by stability analysis. Our results show an increase in maize yield over time with conservation agriculture practices that include rotation and high input use in low rainfall areas. But we observed no difference in system stability under those conditions. We observed a strong relationship between maize grain yield and annual rainfall. Our meta-analysis gave the following findings: (1) 92% of the data show that mulch cover in high rainfall areas leads to lower yields due to waterlogging; (2) 85% of data show that soil texture is important in the temporal development of conservation agriculture effects, improved yields are likely on well-drained soils; (3) 73% of the data show that conservation agriculture practices require high inputs especially N for improved yield; (4) 63% of data show that increased yields are obtained with rotation but calculations often do not include the variations in rainfall within and between seasons; (5) 56% of the data show that reduced tillage with no mulch cover leads to lower yields in semi-arid areas; and (6) when adequate fertiliser is available, rainfall is the most important determinant of yield in southern Africa. It is clear from our results that conservation agriculture needs to be targeted and adapted to specific biophysical conditions for improved impact.

1 February 2011 in Agricultural Systems
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KGKen E Giller
Ken E Giller
PTP. Tittonell
P. Tittonell
MRM.C. Rufino
M.C. Rufino
MWM.T. van Wijk
M.T. van Wijk
SZS. Zingore
S. Zingore
BVB. Vanlauwe
B. Vanlauwe