Benefits of farmer managed natural regeneration to food security in semi-arid Ghana

IF 3.5 2区 社会学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Agriculture and Human Values Pub Date : 2024-02-08 DOI:10.1007/s10460-024-10546-7
Seth Opoku Mensah, Suglo-Konbo Ibrahim, Brent Jacobs, Rebecca Cunningham, Derrick Owusu-Ansah, Evans Adjei
{"title":"Benefits of farmer managed natural regeneration to food security in semi-arid Ghana","authors":"Seth Opoku Mensah,&nbsp;Suglo-Konbo Ibrahim,&nbsp;Brent Jacobs,&nbsp;Rebecca Cunningham,&nbsp;Derrick Owusu-Ansah,&nbsp;Evans Adjei","doi":"10.1007/s10460-024-10546-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Promoting Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR) aims to increase the productive capacities of farmer households. Under FMNR, farmers select and manage natural regeneration on farmlands and keep them under production. While FMNR contributes to the wealth of farming communities, its contribution to household food security has rarely been researched. We, therefore, used a mixed-methods approach to address the research gap by measuring FMNR’s contribution to food security among farmer households in the Talensi district of Ghana. We adopted the Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) and Food Consumption Score (FCS) to estimate food security status among 243 FMNR farmer households and 243 non-FMNR farmer households. Also, we performed a Chi-square test of independence to compare the frequency of each food group (present vs not present) between FMNR adopters and non-FMNR adopters to establish the relationship between adopting FMNR and consuming the FCS and HDDS food groups. Our results reveal that FMNR farmer households are more food secure than non-FMNR farmer households. The HHDS of the FMNR farmer households was 9.6, which is higher than the target value of 9.1. Conversely, the HHDS of the non-FMNR farmer households was 4.3, which is lower than the target value of 9.1. Up to 86% and 37% of the FMNR farmer households and non-FMNR farmer households fell within acceptable FCS; 15% and 17% of FMNR farmer households and non-FMNR farmer households fell within borderline FCS. While none of the FMNR farmer households fell within poor FCS, 46% of non-FMNR farmer households fell within poor FCS. Adopting FMNR is significantly related to consuming all food groups promoted and benefiting from FMNR practices. The paper recommends enabling farmers in semi-arid environments to practice and invest in FMNR for long-term returns to food security.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7683,"journal":{"name":"Agriculture and Human Values","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-024-10546-7.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agriculture and Human Values","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-024-10546-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Promoting Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR) aims to increase the productive capacities of farmer households. Under FMNR, farmers select and manage natural regeneration on farmlands and keep them under production. While FMNR contributes to the wealth of farming communities, its contribution to household food security has rarely been researched. We, therefore, used a mixed-methods approach to address the research gap by measuring FMNR’s contribution to food security among farmer households in the Talensi district of Ghana. We adopted the Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) and Food Consumption Score (FCS) to estimate food security status among 243 FMNR farmer households and 243 non-FMNR farmer households. Also, we performed a Chi-square test of independence to compare the frequency of each food group (present vs not present) between FMNR adopters and non-FMNR adopters to establish the relationship between adopting FMNR and consuming the FCS and HDDS food groups. Our results reveal that FMNR farmer households are more food secure than non-FMNR farmer households. The HHDS of the FMNR farmer households was 9.6, which is higher than the target value of 9.1. Conversely, the HHDS of the non-FMNR farmer households was 4.3, which is lower than the target value of 9.1. Up to 86% and 37% of the FMNR farmer households and non-FMNR farmer households fell within acceptable FCS; 15% and 17% of FMNR farmer households and non-FMNR farmer households fell within borderline FCS. While none of the FMNR farmer households fell within poor FCS, 46% of non-FMNR farmer households fell within poor FCS. Adopting FMNR is significantly related to consuming all food groups promoted and benefiting from FMNR practices. The paper recommends enabling farmers in semi-arid environments to practice and invest in FMNR for long-term returns to food security.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
加纳半干旱地区农民管理自然再生对粮食安全的益处
促进农民管理的自然再生(FMNR)旨在提高农户的生产能力。在 "农民管理自然再生 "计划下,农民选择和管理农田的自然再生,并使其保持生产。虽然 FMNR 有助于增加农业社区的财富,但很少有人研究过它对家庭粮食安全的贡献。因此,我们采用了一种混合方法,通过测量 FMNR 对加纳 Talensi 地区农民家庭粮食安全的贡献,来填补这一研究空白。我们采用家庭膳食多样性评分(HDDS)和食物消费评分(FCS)来估算 243 个调频非农农户和 243 个非调频非农农户的粮食安全状况。此外,我们还进行了独立性的卡方检验,比较了采用全膜非转基因农户与未采用全膜非转基因农户之间每种食物组(存在与不存在)的频率,以确定采用全膜非转基因农户与消费 FCS 和 HDDS 食物组之间的关系。我们的研究结果表明,采用全要素生产方式的农户比未采用全要素生产方式的农户更有粮食保障。调频农户的 HHDS 为 9.6,高于 9.1 的目标值。相反,非 FMNR 农户的 HHDS 为 4.3,低于 9.1 的目标值。分别有高达 86% 和 37% 的调频收听率农户和非调频收听率农户的收听率在可接受范围内;分别有 15% 和 17% 的调频收听率农户和非调频收听率农户的收听率在边缘范围内。虽然没有一个全膜非转基因农户的财务状况属于较差范围,但有 46% 的非全膜非转基因农户的财务状况属于较差范围。采用全要素生产方式与消费所有推广的食物种类和从全要素生产方式中受益有很大关系。本文建议让半干旱环境中的农民实践并投资于全膜非转基因农业,以获得粮食安全的长期回报。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Agriculture and Human Values
Agriculture and Human Values 农林科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
13.30%
发文量
97
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Agriculture and Human Values is the journal of the Agriculture, Food, and Human Values Society. The Journal, like the Society, is dedicated to an open and free discussion of the values that shape and the structures that underlie current and alternative visions of food and agricultural systems. To this end the Journal publishes interdisciplinary research that critically examines the values, relationships, conflicts and contradictions within contemporary agricultural and food systems and that addresses the impact of agricultural and food related institutions, policies, and practices on human populations, the environment, democratic governance, and social equity.
期刊最新文献
Books received A buzzword, a “win-win”, or a signal towards the future of agriculture? A critical analysis of regenerative agriculture Valuing farmers in transitions to more sustainable food systems: A systematic literature review of local food producers’ experiences and contributions in short food supply chains Make the desert bloom—imaginaries, infrastructure, and water-land entanglement in desert agriculture in Israel Correction: Between “better than” and “as good as”: mobilizing social representations of alternative proteins to transform meat and dairy consumption practices
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1