<mods:mods version="3.3" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-3.xsd" xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"><mods:titleInfo><mods:title>Co‐designing the transitions towards integrated market oriented mixed farming systems in semi‐arid Zimbabwe</mods:title></mods:titleInfo><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">S</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Homann-Kee Tui</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">P</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Masikati</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">T</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Dube</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">P D</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Voil</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">D</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Rodriguez</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">A F</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Van Rooyen</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:abstract>In semi‐arid Zimbabwe, multiple constraints impact maize‐based crop‐livestock systems creating a&#13;
poverty trap. These barriers include low soil fertility, variable climates, weak knowledge support,&#13;
and lack of markets. Conventional technical options are insufficient to improve smallholder&#13;
livelihoods. Given the diversity in resource endowments and livelihood sources identifying&#13;
intensification options that fit circumstances remains problematic. In this paper we demonstrate&#13;
co‐designing approaches (i.e. with multiple stakeholders) for two sites i.e. Gwanda and Nkayi&#13;
districts, of contrasting agro‐ecological potential. We engaged low, medium and high resource&#13;
endowed farmers to (i) co‐design plausible improved scenarios that included incremental changes&#13;
‐ testing currently promoted technologies for crop‐livestock intensification and drastic change ‐&#13;
assuming that removing barriers will encourage investments towards resilient and profitable&#13;
farming; and (ii) We quantified benefits and trade offs from alternative integrated actions using an&#13;
integrated whole farm modelling approach (APSFArm‐LivSim‐TOAMD). At both sites incremental&#13;
change options improved food security through better‐integrated cereal‐legume‐livestock&#13;
systems; income effects were however limited. Drastic change options achieved more substantial&#13;
improvements in productivity, food and income generation: farmers set more land in use, with&#13;
more diversified forage, food and cash crops and adapted cultivars, organic and mineral fertilizer&#13;
application, small‐scale mechanization for ploughing and product processing and improved&#13;
livestock management. Packages tailored to farm situations had larger benefits on food security&#13;
and income than blanket applications. Recommendations that take into account the socioeconomic&#13;
context and policies are key and need to be communicated in more effective ways for&#13;
enabling more sustainable futures for smallholders in Zimbabwe.</mods:abstract><mods:classification authority="lcc">Agriculture-Farming, Production, Technology, Economics</mods:classification><mods:originInfo><mods:dateIssued encoding="iso8061">2015-11</mods:dateIssued></mods:originInfo><mods:genre>Conference or Workshop Item</mods:genre></mods:mods>