Sustainabl2e Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
Publication of this book has been made possible through the support of the University of the West Indies, St Augustine, Office 
of the Dean, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Production.
About CTA
The Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) is a joint international institution of the African, 
Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States and the European Union (EU). Its mission is to advance food and nutritional 
security, increase prosperity and encourage sound natural resource management in ACP countries. It provides access to 
information and knowledge, facilitates policy dialogue and strengthens the capacity of agricultural and rural development 
institutions and communities. 
CTA operates under the framework of the Cotonou Agreement and is funded by the EU.
For more information on CTA, visit www.cta.int
Sustainable Food Production 
Practices in the Caribbean
Volume 2
Edited by 
Wayne G. Ganpat and Wendy-Ann P. Isaac
First published in Jamaica 2015 by
Ian Randle Publishers
11 Cunningham Avenue
Kingston 6
www.ianrandlepublishers.com
Introduction and editorial material
copyright 2015 Wayne Ganpat and Wendy-Ann Isaac
ISBN 978-976-637-889-9
NATIONAL LIBRARY OF JAMAICA CATALOGUING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA 
Sustainable food production practices in the Caribbean. Volume 2 / 
Wayne G. Ganpat and Wendy-Ann Isaac.
pages : illustrations;  cm. Includes index.
ISBN 978-976-637-889-9  (pbk)
1.  Sustainable agriculture – Caribbean Area
2.  Food crops – Caribbean Area
I.   Ganpat, Wayne G., editor  II.  Isaac, Wendy-Ann, editor
338.19   dc 23
All rights reserved. While copyright in the selection and editorial material is vested in Wayne G.  Ganpat 
and Wendy-Ann P. Isaac, copyright in individual chapters belongs to their respective authors and no part of 
this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means 
electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior expressed permission of the editors and 
publisher.
Book  and Cover design by Ian Randle Publishers
Printed and bound in China 
Disclaimer
 It is the wish of the editors, authors and publisher that the content of this book add value to readers in the area of food 
production but at the same time disclaim any liability, loss or risk, personal or otherwise, which is incurred as a consequence, 
directly or indirectly, of the use and application of any of the contents of this book.  
Although suggestions and recommendations given are accurate in most cases, because of the diversity in the region they 
are sometimes general in nature and may not meet the specific circumstances of individual situations. Moreover, mention, 
visual representation or inferred reference of a product, service, manufacturer or organisation in this publication does not 
imply endorsement by the authors.  Exclusion does not imply a negative evaluation.  Designations used by companies to 
distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks.  All brand names and product names used in this book are trade 
names, service marks, trademarks, or registered trademarks of their respective owners.  The publisher is not associated with 
any product or vendor mentioned in this book.  
Table of Contents
List of Images ... vii
List of Figures ... ix
List of Tables ... xiv
List of Information Boxes ... xvi
Foreword ... xvii
Preface ... xix
Acknowledgements ... xxiii
1. The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers 
in Sustainable Food Production and Food Security ... 1
Theresa Ann Rajack-Talley
2. Youth: Adding Value to Agriculture in the Caribbean ... 34
Nicole Webster and Wayne G. Ganpat
3. Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks ... 53
Cicero H. O. Lallo, Adrian Paul and Sebrena Smalling
4. Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production ... 107
Chaney C.G. St. Martin
5. Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean ... 140
Wendy-Ann P. Isaac and Ayub Khan
6. Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in 
the Caribbean ... 169
Mark N. Wuddivira, Melissa A. Atwell and Gaius D. Eudoxie 
7. Sustaining The Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm ... 209
Marcus N.A. Ramdwar, Rohanie Maharaj and Narendra Siew
8. Appropriate Logistics to Reduce Losses in the Postharvest Handling 
System: Case of Mango ... 243
Majeed Mohammed
9. Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept 
to Design ... 263
Audrey Fanchone, Jean-Louis Diman, Gisèle Alexandre, Serge Valet and 
Harry Ozier-Lafontaine
10. Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for 
Sustainable Food Production ... 303
Leighton Naraine, Stuart LaPlace, Clare Bowen-O’Connor, Amenold Pierre 
and Kevin Meehan
11. Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean  ... 353
Ravindra Ramnarine and Denny Dipchansingh
12. A Method for Growing Tilapia in Atlantic Seawater in St 
Kitts: A Sustainable Alternative to Traditional Coastal Fishery 
Systems ... 380
Barrington E.O. Brown
Notes on Contributors ... 421
Index ... 431
List of Images
Chapter One
 Women play key roles in record keeping on livestock farms /91
Caribbean women are responsible for selling 12-50 percent of the region’s local fruits & 
vegetables. /91
Marketing has historically provided women and their families with a source of income. /91
Small producers do adopt safe and regulated practices. /92
Women dominate in post-harvest and packaging activities. /92
When given the opportunity women excel in agriculture science. /92
Chapter Two
Attending to seedlings in hydroponics system /93
Grafting mango, Nevis /93
Maintaining drip irrigation line in onion /94
Pruning tomato under greenhouse, Jamaica /94
Banner at EARTH University in Costa Rica.  /95
Young Stars 4H Club members in their hydroponic project in Trinidad. /95
Chapter Five
Aphids on Citrus /199
Whitefly parasitised by entomopathogenic fungi /199
Fruitfly on guava /199
Fruitfly larva in guava /199
Ladybird larva feeding on aphids /200
Ladybird pupa /200
Ocimum sanctum Tulsi /200
Gliricidia  as a living fence /200
Lemongrass /201
Pussley /201
Soursop Leaf /201
Vervine /201
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Chapter Six
Farming on hillslopes /202
Contour farming on slopes Paramin, Trinidad /202
Contour farming on steep slopes /202
Cracking of soil in South Oropouche, Trinidad /203
Waterlogged soil in South Trinidad /203
Waterlogged field /203
Water logged soil in South Trinidad /204
Rain water harvesting in Moruga, Trinidad /204
Rain water harvesting in Moruga /204
Rain water harvesting in rural Trinidad /205
Water Storage /205
Desalinization Equipment /205
Polluted water  well /206
Sluice gate in South Trinidad /206
Solid waste polluting dammed water supply /206
South Oropouche river to Gulf of Paria /207
Surface water /207
Surface river water /207
Surface river water leading to sea /207
Pond in Aranguez, Trinidad /208
Tributary supply to a dam /208
Turbid river water after heavy rains /208
viii |
List of Figures
Chapter Two 
Figure 2.1: The Sustainable Value Chain Framework /43
Figure 2.2:  Components of the Proposed Youth Making a Difference Model  /47
Chapter Three
Figure 3.1:  Carcass of a rabbit fed forage with reduced concentrate levels /96
Figure 3.2:  Doe accepting male for mating  /96
Figure 3.3:  Nest with new born kits  /97
Figure 3.4:  Proper method of holding growing rabbits /97
Figure 3.5:  Proper method of holding adult /heavy rabbits /98
Figure 3.6:  Open sided house at Aripo Livestock Station, Trinidad  /98
Figure 3.7:  Wire mesh cages with feeding facilities inside /99
Figure 3.8:  Limited feeder space and competition for feed at higher stocking density /99
Figure 3.9:  Pekin breeder ducks at Central Farms, Trinidad /100
Figure 3.10A:  Common Muscovy strain /100
Figure 3.10B:  White Muscovy strain used by commercial farmers /101
Figure 3.11A:  Multi-coloured Mule duck /101
Figure 3.11B:  White Mule duck  /101
Figure 3.12A:  Intensive system with deep litter floor /102
Figure 3.12B:  Intensive system with solid dirt floor /102
Figure 3.12D:  Semi-intensive system (Trinidad) /103
Figure 3.12C:  Semi-intensive system (Guyana)  /103
Figure 3.13:  Integrated duck production system with fish, Sugarcane Feeds Centre, 
Trinidad /104
Figure 3.14:  Back yard subsistence production system in Trinidad /104
Figure 3.15:   Examples of brooding facilities used in Trinidad  /105
 Figure 3.16:   Duck processing at Central Farms, Trinidad  /106
Figure 3.17:   Whole frozen duck carcasses on sale in a supermarket in Trinidad /106
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Figure 3.18A: Flock production record sheet   /87
Figure 3.18B:  Template for evaluating the cost of broiler duck production  /88
Chapter Four
Figure 4.1.:  Flat or slanted-roof /193
Figure 4.2:  Single-bed RS with an arched roof  /193
Figure 4.3:  Double-bed RS with an A-roof /194
Figure 4.4:  Multiple-beds, large-scaled RS with an arched roof.  /194
Figure 4.5:  Diagram of nethouse opening; arrows indicate directions that doors (indicated by 
slanted boxes) slide.  /113
Figure 4.6:  Structural, covering, connecting, and fastening components of RH/NH. /195
Figure 4.7:  Drawing of single-bed rain shelter with an arched roof /115
Figure 4.8:  A recommended crop rotation system /196
Figure 4.9:  Plastic mulch being installed manually /196
Figure 4.10:  Bacterial leaf spot and downy mildew of lettuce /197
Chapter Seven
Figure 7.1:  Agricultural nonpoint pollutants from crop and livestock production 
systems /211
Figure 7.2:  Placement of fertilizer on the uphill side of slope (X) /218
Figure 7.3:  Algal growth (green) associated with animal manure /295
Figure 7.4:  Solid and liquid waste from feedlot /296
Figure 7.5:  The active drug ingredients found in broiler starter feed /227
Figure 7.6:  ‘Farm to Fork’ Food Value Chain /232
Chapter Eight
Figure 8.1:  Postharvest handling operations and value chain for mango /243
Figure 8.2:  Skin colour at different stages of maturity and ripening cv. Long /297
Figure 8.3:  Flesh colour at different stages of ripening cv. Long /297
Figure 8.4:  Latex stains on harvested fruits /298
Figure 8.5:  Various types of physical damages /298
Figure 8.6:  Mango seed weevil  /298
x |
List of Figures
Figure 8.8:  Fresh-cut mango slices in retail market /299
Figure 8.9:  Frozen mango chunks /299
Figure 8.11:  Anthracnose infections on cv. Julie mango fruit /300
Figure 8.10:  Mango value-added products /300
Figure 8.12:  Scale insect damage  /301
Figure 8.13:  Bird damage  /301
Chapter Nine
Figure 9.1:  A comparison of natural ecosystems, conventional cropping systems and 
agroecosystems inspired from natural ecosystems, with emphasis on crop 
protection.  /266
Figure 9.2:  The multi-scale framework of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment  /268
Figure 9.3:  Classification of ecosystem services from the Millennium Ecosystem 
Assessment  /269
Figure 9.4:  An example of a Creole garden which involves the growing of annual and biennial 
agricultural crops along with forest species. /302
Figure 9.5:  An example of multispecies system in a Guadeloupe farm /302
Figure 9.6:  DISC method application on the Guadeloupian citrus production /284
Figure 9.7:  The general structure of BANAD, a bio-economic farm model for the assessment 
of the impact of innovation adoption  /286
 Figure 9.8: Diagrammatic representation of a ICLS based on the integration of 
banana crops, and small or large ruminants production  /287
Chapter Ten
Figure 10.1:  Trends in CARICOM agricultural trade /304
Figure 10.2:   Food imports and exports in St Kitts-Nevis  /305
Figure 10.3:   Total sweet pepper and tomato production from 2004 to 2013 /317
Figure 10.4:  Shade house with tomato crops, Dekade, Haiti /391
Figure 10.5:  Shade house with cabbage crops, Makaya, Haiti /391
Figure 10.6A:  Greenhouse with vertical hydroponics system /392
Figure 10.6B:  Outdoor irrigation controller /392
Figure 10.7A:  Organoponics lettuce /322         
Figure 10.7B:  Hydroponics lettuce germination /322
| xi
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Figure 10.7C:  Organoponics basil /322            
Figure 10.7D:   Hydroponics basil germination /322
Figure 10.7E:  Parsley /322
Figure 10.8A:  Lettuce organoponics  /323            
Figure 10.8B:  Lettuce hydroponics /323
Figure 10.8C:  Basil organoponics  /323             
Figure 10.8D:  Basil hydroponics  /323
Figure 10.9A:  Lettuce organoponics      /324
Figure 10.9B:  Basil organoponics /324
Figure 10.10:   XPSM 300 designed by S. LaPlace (aeroponics/nutrient film technique and ebb 
flow) /393
Figure 10.11:   Sweet Bell Pepper and Cucumber 2011 /393
Figure 10.12:  Hydroponics system used by students and faculty for on-going research in crop 
production  /394
Figure 10.13:  Initial system run with 17 different crops /394
Figure 10.14:  Strawberries with limited phosphorus /394
Figure 10.15:  Eggplants blooming /395
Figure 10.16: Lettuce in hydroponics in 2008 /395
Figure 10.17:  Kentucky String Beans in 2012 /395
Figure 10.18:  Cabbage 2009 /396
Figure 10.19:  Yellow Bell Peppers in 2013 /396
Figure 10.20:  Student observing plant growth in hydroponic system at CFBC Plant Research 
Facility /397
Figure 10.21:  Detail of recent price-saving adaptation of hydroponic system using 5-gallon 
buckets to contain nutrient solution. /397
Figure 10.22:   Students at CFBC sowing seeds in a hydroponics system /397
Figure 10.23:  Lettuce under 30 percent shade @ 23days in hydroponics system /398
Figure 10.24:  Lettuce under 50 percent shade @ 23 days in hydroponics system /398
Figure 10.25:  Iceberg lettuce under 30 percent shade @ 38days in hydroponics system /398
Figure 10.26:  Iceberg lettuce under 50 percent shade @ 38days in hydroponics system /398
xii |
List of Figures
Figure 10.27:  CFBC students preparing organoponics planting trays with plastic lining /399
Figure 10.28:   CFBC shade house design with hydroponics to the right and organoponics to the 
left /399
Figure 10.29:  Sketch of lightweight concrete planting trays /346
Figure 10.30:  CFBC students transplanting seedlings from hydroponic to organoponic planting 
trays /399
Chapter Eleven
Figure 11.1:  Map of the Caribbean showing location of the 15 CARICOM countries 
(underlined) /358
Figure 11.2:  Fruit trees planted on hillside terracing with forest species at the St. Michael’s 
Station, Tacarigua, Trinidad /400
Figure 11.3:  Fruit trees (mango) and forest species used for soil erosion control /400
Figure 11.4:  A mix of coconut, fruit trees and forest species planted on a sloping 
hillside /401
Figure 11.5:  Caribbean pine grown with other fruit trees /401
Figure 11.6:  Taunga system in which cocoa and bananas are planted with forest species (cedar 
and mahogany) /402
Figure 11.8:  Livestock (cattle farming) under coconut trees in Cocal, Trinidad /403
Figure 11.9:  Aquaculture with food crops (bananas and plantain) and forest species 
(cedar). The agroforestry system belongs to Mr. Jagessar Dan of Rio Claro, 
Trinidad. /403
Figure 11.10:  Tilapia fishes grown in agroforestry system are an important and healthy food 
source /403
Chapter Twelve
Figure 12.1:   Pond at SNAPPER project /404
Figure 12.2:   Tilapia Feeding /404
Figure 12.3:   Demand Feeder System /405
Figure 12.4:   Jamaica Red Snapper (Tilapia Hybrid) /405
Figure 12.5:   Typical Tilapia Farm Tour /406
Figure 12.6:   Snapper Project Coordinator Conducting Farm Tour /406
Figure 12.7:  Dr Barrington Brown (L) Project Coordinator (SNAPPER) and Mr Samuel 
Heyliger, Senior Fisheries Officer, Department of Marine Resources, St 
Kitts  /406
| xiii
List of Tables
Table 3.1:  Performance of rabbits (mean values) fed three different forages with a 
commercial rabbit concentrate /59
Table 3.2:  Carcass yield of growing crossbred (Californian x Chinchilla x New Zealand 
White) rabbits fed different forages with reduced concentrate levels /60
Table 3.3:  Summary of the performance for Pekin (PK1 and PK2) and Mule (MUC) ducks 
reared at Central Farms /71
Table 3.4:  Summary of the performance for Mule (MUC, MUS) ducks reared at Central 
Farms /72
Table 4.1:  Key physical and chemical propertiesi of soilless substrates for the production of 
leafy vegetables /118
Table 4.2.  Recommended nutrient ranges for lettuce  /124
Table 5.1:  Management of field and storage pests in the Caribbean /145
Table 5.2:  Insect and disease problems in crops and local crop protection methods used and 
knowledge source /146
Table 5.3:  Non-chemical methods used to prevent insects during post-harvest including 
storage /148
Table 5.4:  Non-chemical storage of vegetative plant parts /149
Table 5.5:  Harvesting plant parts /157
Table 6.1:  Water resources in selected Caribbean countries and water supply 
situation /174
Table 7.1:  The fate processes of pesticides in the environment and the mechanisms 
associated with the processes /212
Table 7.2:  WHO and EPA acute toxicity classes for pesticides /214
Table 7.3:  Summary of groundwater contamination potential as influenced by water, 
pesticide and soil characteristics /215
Table 7.4:  Commonly used stocking densities for livestock and poultry production in the 
region  /222
Table 7.5:  Some on-farm considerations to reduce food safety hazards /233
Table 8.1:  Mango fruit grading protocols /246
List of Tables
Table 8.2:  Flesh firmness according to stage of ripeness /253
Table 8.3:  Factors influencing pre-harvest and postharvest defects in mango 
fruits /260
Table 9.1:  Foliage and non-conventional feeds offered to goats and pigs as examples of 
the high biodiversity of Latin America /280
Table 9.2:  Resources consumed by wild mammals in Trinidad and Tobago  /281
  Table 10.1:  Results from tomato varietal trial comparing four Israeli cultivars /312
Table 10.2:  Tissue culture laboratories in various Caribbean countries and major crops 
produced /313
Table 10.3:  Protected agriculture structures in CARICOM territories /316
Table 10.4:  Water use across three (3) growing systems using lettuce (Lactuca 
sativa) /339
Table 10.5:  Results for lettuce (Lactuca sativa) with 30 percent shade vs. 50 percent 
shade /340
 Table 10.6: Plant productivity and water usage across three growing 
systems /347
Table 10.7:  Profitability estimates for hydroponic production of 300 plants in the CFBC 
Plant Hydroponics System * /347
Table 11.1.   Forest types and percent of land area occupied for Continental (Belize, 
Guyana, and Suriname) and Island countries in the CARICOM 
Region /359
Table 11.2.  Some traditional tree and crop species used in Caribbean agroforestry 
systems /360
Table 11.3.  Population for each CARICOM country for the 1990/91 and 2010/11 census 
years. /378
| xv
List of Information Boxes
Box 1.1:  Contribution of small producers and family farms to sustainable development /14
Box 1.2:   Sex versus Gender /17
Box 3.1:  Best Practices For Feeding Rabbits In Hot, Humid Climates /61
Box 3.2:  Best Practices for Breeding Rabbits /63
Box 3.3:  Biosecurity Measures to be Observed When Rearing Ducks /82
Box 4.1:  Audit verification checklist for site selection for establishment of RS/NH  /110
Box 4.2:  Audit verification checklist for proper design and structure of NH and RS /112
Box 4.3:  Construction process for RH/GH /198
Box 4.4:  Audit verification checklist for growth substrate selection /119
Box 4.5:  Audit verification checklist for disinfecting growth substrates /120
Box 4.6:  Audit verification checklist for adjusting pH /120
Box 4.8:  Audit verification checklist for propagation practices /123
Box 4.9:  Audit verification checklist for transplanting and plant spacing in a containerized-
production system /123
Box 4.10:  Audit verification checklist for nutrient management /125
Box 4.11:  Audit verification checklist for pest and disease identification and monitoring  /127
Box 4.12:  Audit verification checklist for sanitation, resistant cultivars and environment /128
Box 4.13:  Audit verification checklist for cultural and chemical practices /129
Box 4.14:  Audit verification checklist for harvest and post-harvest /135
Box 5.1:  Other pests and diseases which can be managed using some common insect repellent 
plants found throughout the Caribbean: /154
Box 5.2:  Prevention and control methods for insects and diseases /155
Box 5.3:  Advantages of natural plant insecticides /156
Box 5.4:  Other plants with naturally-occurring insect repellent properties /164
Box 10.1:   Benefits and Limitations to the Adoption of  Tissue Culture /315
Box 10.2:  Benefits and Limitations of Shade House, Protected Farming Compared to Traditional 
Open-Air, Rain-Fed Agriculture /319
Box 10.3:  Specific Benefits and Limitations for Rural Haiti /319
Foreword
Isaac Bekele, PhD
Dean, Faculty of Food and Agriculture
The University of the West Indies, St Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago
With each passing day, the need to produce healthy and nutritious food in a sustainable 
manner increases. While scientists and food producers actively seek out alternative ways to 
produce food to meet this demand, other challenging events to food production now require 
a redoubling of efforts. The ever increasing impacts of climate change in the Caribbean 
which have been predicted to be manifested in more frequent extreme events such as 
stronger hurricanes, longer droughts, severe floods, and more virulent pests and diseases, 
now demand that sustainable food production should rise to the top of the region’s agenda 
for immediate action.
The pressing need for food following extreme events is likely to force producers to engage 
in non-sustainable practices such as: injudicious use of inorganic chemicals, misuse of scarce 
water resources, practise extreme land tillage practices, abandon rest periods, and clear 
virgin forests, all in an effort to produce food rapidly in a period of high demand.  All of 
these, and other likely non-sustainable practices which may be adopted because of urgency 
to meet the demand for food in a dire situation, could roll back the gains the region has made 
in the last few years towards implementing more sustainable food production practices.
The role of education in the effort to produce safe and nutritious food in a sustainable 
manner is of paramount importance, and therefore cannot be overstated. Research will 
have little impact if food producers are not adequately educated and well-equipped to make 
deliberate and determined efforts to adopt more sustainable approaches to food production 
over the entire value chain. 
To support the region’s effort to develop a sustainable food production system, the first 
volume titled Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean was published in 
2012. This second volume is meant to provide a seamless transition from Volume 1.  It 
provides technical information, in an easy reading style on a variety of practices, which 
if adopted, have the potential to transform present unsustainable approaches to food 
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
production to those which can meet the region’s food needs while reducing stresses and 
strains on the environment. The quality and appropriateness of the information in this 
volume, as well as the de-emphasis on technical jargon, makes this book essential reading 
for students in agriculture at all levels and in particular, the CSEC and CAPE levels and for 
those pursuing the various Diplomas in Agriculture around the region. While it can be also 
used as a reference book by students at the higher level, some eager farmers could make 
use of its offerings. Although the two volumes are useful as essential resource materials for 
the region’s extension practitioners, their content is relevant and appropriate to tropical 
agriculture generally. 
The region has taken too long to embark on the road to sustainable food production, 
and the consequences are ever present, as can be seen in the denuded hillsides in some 
countries, an over-abundance of weeds, pests and diseases, unusable soils, and the heavy 
use of chemicals. The region has a long road to recovery.  Sustainable production of safe 
and nutritious food is therefore critical to the welfare of all people in the region. This second 
volume is aimed at supporting the region’s effort to develop sustainable food production 
systems by promoting the use of appropriate practices, as the region cannot always expect 
the problems faced internally to be solved externally. Land, water and other non-renewable 
resources in the region are very limited, and are now being threatened by events over which 
we have little control.  Despite this however, all of us who live in this region can take actions 
to mitigate any negative impacts. To overcome these imminent challenges, the region 
must strengthen its efforts to work harder and smarter to achieve more sustainable food 
production systems, a legacy for future generations of the Caribbean.
xviii |
Preface
Wayne G. Ganpat and Wendy-Ann P. Isaac
Faculty of Food and Agriculture, The University of the West Indies
St Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago
At present, a grave concern facing the Caribbean is the creation of sustainable food 
production systems. Over the past four decades, the increasing unsustainable use of 
agricultural inputs has become very evident in the farming sector, without much warnings 
being given about the adverse health and environmental impacts associated with them.  Over 
the next few decades, countries in the region can expect increases in food prices due to rises 
in fossil fuel prices and climate change events. Alternative, sustainable farming and food 
systems must be encouraged if we are to maintain a supply of healthy food at reasonable 
prices.  Our region cannot afford to remain complacent about food security and must 
urgently take swift action to boost the agricultural sector and empower our food producers. 
The 12 chapters in this book are a blended collection of sustainable best management 
practices that were not  covered in the first volume, Sustainable Food Production Practices 
in the Caribbean. Included chapters present other innovative technologies for adoption to 
meet food security needs in the Caribbean region. Topics covered in this volume include: 
the role of small producers, family farms and women farmers in sustainable food production 
and food security; youth as adding value to agriculture in the region; small animal systems 
(rabbits and ducks); rain shelters and net-houses for vegetable production; natural and 
indigenous crop protection methods; sustainable water management practices for food 
production in the Caribbean; sustaining the environment (farm and beyond the farm); 
appropriate logistics to reduce losses in the postharvest handling system; appropriate 
agrosystems in the Caribbean; agricultural diversification and non-traditional systems for 
sustainable food production; agroforestry systems and practices in the Caribbean;  and a 
note that introduces a method for growing tilapia in Atlantic seawater in St Kitts.
This book should be useful for those involved in food production throughout the region 
as it seeks to educate them about practices that threaten the Caribbean’s conditions of 
sustainability, which have resulted in a misuse of resources, soil and water pollution, land 
erosion and loss of biodiversity. The book analyses these problems and offers approaches, 
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
methods, tools and techniques to enable a more sustainable and rational use of our resources 
which include our human capital – the people, especially the youth.  It is anticipated that 
this book will be a useful reference to preserve and enhance sustainable productivity to 
ensure food security and sustainable agriculture in the region. 
Chapter One begins with an analysis of the role of women and small family farming 
systems in the domestic food sector and food security in the Caribbean.  The chapter reviews 
the historical role of women in Caribbean agriculture, briefly describing women’s work in 
the fields on the plantations, as well as in the production of food for home consumption. 
It describes the roles of women and shows how their contributions in the domestic food 
sector are particularly important for food security in the region and areas in which such 
contributions can be strengthened. 
With the average age of farmers in the region being over 50 years, and the continuing 
perception that agriculture is unattractive to young persons, Chapter Two is positioned 
from a context of change and empowerment for youth engagement in agriculture across the 
Caribbean region.  The authors contend that in order for young people to be fully integrated 
in society, they must be given the resources to become fully empowered for productivity. 
Based on an analysis of rural youth agricultural programmes across the globe and the formal 
reports of Caribbean youth leaders, a model for engagement is proposed. Because of the 
diversity in the region, a flexible rather than a fixed model is suggested. Each country could 
choose from the essential components to make its own model.  Using this approach, the 
authors believe that the face, and more importantly, the productivity of agriculture can be 
changed. For this to happen however, young people within the Caribbean must be supported 
by appropriate, sustainable interventions that allow them to fully engage the sector. The 
chapter suggests several such interventions.
Chapter Three presents a production guide for potential rabbit and duck farmers.  The 
authors point out that over the last decade, there has been a move from small backyard 
production to medium-sized intensive commercial and semi-commercial rabbit production 
systems in Trinidad and Tobago. In tandem, there has also been an increase in duck 
production and a similar trend towards intensive and semi-intensive production systems. 
The authors clearly outline guidelines for increased productivity in these enterprises. Those 
persons wishing to enter these areas will also find the information quite useful. 
Chapter Four provides a comprehensive overview of best management practices 
(BMPs) for sustainable production of vegetables in rain-shelters and net-houses. In contrast 
to the first volume of this book, the focus is placed on the production of leafy vegetables, 
mainly lettuce, rather than tomato.  However, owing to similarities among protective 
structures, some of the principles and practices, which are described in detail in the first 
volume, have been summarized and new, valuable information is presented. 
xx |
Preface
Chapter Five seeks to undo the historical emphasis on synthetic pesticides through 
a review of various natural and indigenous/traditional crop protection strategies used 
throughout the Caribbean. It details the significance of promoting and supporting these 
ecologically based strategies for the sustainable production of food by small producers to 
ensure food security in the region. The results of surveys conducted among aging farmers 
throughout the Caribbean are used in this chapter which also explores other examples which 
could be successfully adopted from other countries. The chapter concludes by emphasizing 
the need for research and development to capture, assess and disseminate natural and 
indigenous crop protection strategies widely across the Caribbean.  
With expected decreases in the amount of rainfall in coming years, water availability for 
agriculture within the region will be severely affected unless sustainable water management 
practices are engaged. Therefore, to achieve a sustainable, functioning environment and a 
food secure Caribbean region, water management practices that are appropriate must be an 
integral part of the way we use our water resources. Adopting sustainable water management 
practices will alleviate several economic, social and environmental impacts, and will have 
far reaching benefits to cope with the myriads of constraints that are inimical to achieving 
food security in the Caribbean region. Chapter Six outlines some of these sustainable 
water management practices for food production in the Caribbean.  
Chapter Seven examines what is involved in sustaining the environment of the farm by 
focusing on several of the complex interrelationships that exist between food production and 
food safety within an environmental context. The chapter also provides recommendations to 
reduce the adverse impacts of agro-environmental hazards and food safety considerations 
which have a direct impact on societies globally.
The need for logistics management of fruits have come to the fore following the recent 
global energy crisis followed by the global financial crisis. Logistics management is an 
important tool in the area of post-harvest management and its main purpose is to enhance 
competiveness, while ensuring a focus on serviceability.  Chapter Eight outlines some of 
these logistic management strategies available for adoption, using mangoes as an example. 
In the Caribbean, multi-species systems whether mixed cropping systems, livestock 
farming systems or integrated ones, provide several environmental services. Using these 
systems as examples, Chapter Nine examines the major driving forces that condition 
changes in farming practices – agro-ecological engineering, and proposes methods that 
might support the design of innovative agricultural systems. The authors provide concrete 
examples from several Caribbean and other tropical environments.
Chapter Ten treats with agricultural diversification and non-traditional systems for 
sustainable food production. It deals with the challenge of creating a sustainable supply 
| xxi
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
of food for local consumption in the Caribbean with some potential for export.  While it is 
important to note the recent trends in large-scale production, including a long decline in 
plantation systems geared for the export of single crops, and more recent attempts to boost 
commercial farming for delivery to niche export markets, the chapter looks at recent and 
emerging efforts to implement non-traditional systems geared to small-scale farming.  These 
systems are aimed at strengthening local food security and adapting traditional farming 
methods in the face of climate change. 
Chapter Eleven traces the historical evolution of the agro-forestry system, and gives a 
broad overview of agro-forestry from an international perspective. Agro-forestry is presented 
as an exciting opportunity for farmers but not as a cure-all for all our land-use problems. 
As with any other land-use option, agro-forestry involves trade-offs, i.e., some short-term 
gains may have to be given up for the sake of long-term sustainability. Throughout the 
chapter, references and examples are provided for countries belonging to the Caribbean 
Community (CARICOM).
The final chapter in the book, Chapter Twelve, presents a note that introduces a method 
for growing Tilapia in Atlantic seawater in the island of St Kitts as a sustainable alternative 
to the traditional coastal fishery systems.
In conclusion, it is our deep desire that this book will be a fitting complement to Volume 
1 and that all who read it will be greatly enriched by the wealth of information presented 
by the various contributions.
xxii |
Acknowledgements
This book is a collaborative effort to which many people have contributed. Most 
importantly, we thank God for giving us the strength and fortitude and our family members 
for their support and cooperation during the completion of this project.  We acknowledge 
with gratitude all the contributing authors as well as the Dean of the Faculty of Food and 
Agriculture, Dr Isaac Bekele, for his overall support. We also convey our special thanks 
to Dr Michelle John for her kind help, support and valuable comments in reviewing each 
chapter. We are grateful to Ms Amanda Ali for help at crucial times with the various drafts. 
Dr Selby Nichols, the Head of the Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, 
has always been quite supportive of our efforts. We acknowledge with special gratitude Dr. 
Ian Randle, of Ian Randle Publishers, who believes in us and our work!

The Role of Small Producers, 
Family Farms and Women 
Farmers in Sustainable Food 
Production and Food Security
Theresa Ann Rajack-Talley
INTRODUCTION
In the world today, there are over 500 million small producers and 
family farms.  Eighty percent of all farm holdings in developing countries, 
including the Caribbean, are family owned and operated, and although 
they practise small scale production, grow 80 percent of the world’s food 
that feeds billions every day.  Small producers and family farms are also 
known to be important preservers of the world’s natural resources as they 
conserve ecosystems and biodiversity.  At the same time, they experience 
many barriers because of the size of their operations, systems of production, 
what they produce, their modus operandi, and their management practices. 
Further, the areas where women predominate as farm managers, partners, 
family labour and/or wage labourers, are continuously neglected because of 
gender discrimination. As a result, it is difficult for many small producers 
and family farms to move beyond subsistence levels. Consequently most of 
the world’s poor are the very ones producing half of the world’s food – the 
women and men small farmers and their families.  
Most farming families live in humble homes and operate low-resource 
farms.  They are often stereotyped as uneducated, resistant to technology 
and modern practices, and are criticized for having a non-profit management 
orientation. Nevertheless, the data show that small producers and family 
farms are consistently producing food in sustainable ways. The United 
Nations (UN) reports that small producers and family farms play a major 
role in hunger reduction and sustainable development and has designated 
2014 as the International Year of Family Farming.  They also suggest that 
C H A P T E R  ONE
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
agricultural production worldwide should be transformed from predominantly large-scale 
and intensive farming systems to small-scale sustainable models, in order to alleviate poverty 
and eradicate hunger (UN 2011).  In the Caribbean, this means a tangible shift from the 
favoured male-dominated, ‘cash’ crop export-oriented focus to domestic food production 
and greater emphasis on the role of women in agriculture. This will require a repositioning 
of the farm family system from the periphery to the centre of the region’s agricultural sector. 
A redirection of Caribbean agriculture is extremely important at this time for two main 
reasons. First the food import bill has been rapidly climbing and was estimated at US$3–6 
billion for the region for the 2012–2013 period. With the exception of Belize and Guyana, 
most of the Caribbean countries are net importers of food, averaging 60 percent in some 
cases and as high as 80 percent in others.  Such high levels of food importation compete with 
local food production and gives rise to uncertainties in the domestic agricultural sector and 
food prices.  Further, a heavy dependency on importation to satisfy food demands presents 
a threat to the region’s food security and the dietary patterns and nutrition of Caribbean 
people. The importation of foods is usually accompanied by a fast food culture and the 
use of highly processed foods that elevate levels of salt, fats and sugars, and often results 
in an increase in obesity, hypertension, and other health related conditions. Secondly, the 
removal of protective markets for some of the region’s most important agricultural exports 
such as sugar and bananas has resulted in a decline in the sales and prices of these products 
on the open market.  Consequently, farm families who depended on the sales from export 
crops experienced serious losses in income.  To a large extent, prior farm owners had no 
other alternative but to become wage earners and seek non-agricultural sources of income, 
losing the freedom and autonomy that family farms offered.  Additionally, hundreds of farm 
labourers from rural villages across the Caribbean are now unemployed.
These developments in the Caribbean have fronted an urgent call to diversify the 
agricultural sector and focus on food security and sustainable development.  At the core of 
this plan lies the network of small producers and family farms that are scattered throughout 
the landscape of the region.  Since women play major roles as small producers in local food 
production and marketing, such a reorientation also necessitates addressing gender issues 
in agriculture (FAO 2011).  In other words, supporting small farming systems and gender 
equality are both necessary for sustainable agricultural development that meets the food 
and healthy dietary needs of people, maintains and generates employment, and supports 
the social, cultural, and economic development of rural communities and society at large. 
The following analyses and discussions attempt to explain further the role of small 
producers and family farms in sustainable agricultural production, food security, and 
economic growth for the Caribbean.  In the process, the negative images of the ‘peasant’ 
2 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
farmer are demystified and the role of women in domestic food production, processing and 
marketing, inevitably becomes central to the discussions. They begin with a brief account of 
the history of small producers and family farms and their role in agricultural diversification. 
The continued importance of the sector and small farm production systems are discussed 
along with a profile of the small producer and the family farm. Core to the discourse is 
the relationship between the plantation system and the family farming system, the export 
market and the domestic food sector.  Within the discourse, women’s roles are highlighted, 
their potential explored, and the challenges they face identified.  At the end of the chapter, 
recommendations are made that tie together small producers, family farms, gender equality, 
and sustainable food production in the Caribbean.
However before we discuss the role of small producers, family farms, and women in food 
security and sustainable development, it is important to understand what is food security 
and what do we mean by sustainable development.  The World Food Summit of 1996 defined 
food security as having three main pillars:
• Food availability: sufficient quantities on a consistent basis;
• Food access: having sufficient resources to obtain appropriate foods for nutritious 
diets; and
• Food use: appropriate use based on knowledge of basic nutrition along with adequate 
water and sanitation.
On the other hand, according to the Atangana (2012), the President of the Pan-African 
Farmers’ Association, for agricultural development to be sustainable the following basic 
principles should be adhered to:
• The system should be able to feed the family and ensure an income; 
• The system must work in harmony with the environment and therefore be based 
on agro-ecological production; 
• The sector should also be able to sustain employment; and 
• Sustainable agricultural development should incorporate agricultural diversification 
as an alternative to industrial type mono-cropping systems
Achieving sustainable food production, therefore, ensures food security and having food 
security means that the basic right of people to the food they need is met.  Within these 
two understandings, the small producer and the family farm appear to be good models on 
which sustainable food production can be built.  Moreover, both the small producer and 
the family farm have proven to be persistent and strong features of the rural landscape of 
many Caribbean countries.  On these farms women are the main growers of local foods, 
| 3
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
and in the home they assume responsibility for planning and preparing the meals/diets of 
families, and society at large.  It stands to reason therefore, that regional food security can 
be increased by changing the focus of agricultural production to support the small producer 
and the family farm, as well as enhancing the wide ranging role of women.  But who are 
small farmers and how can family farms contribute to sustainable development?
THE SMALL PRODUCER AND THE FAMILY FARM
Farmers who produce on a small scale are often part of a family farm operation and are 
sometimes referred to as peasants, small farmers or small cultivators. In the Caribbean, the 
history of their evolution is tied to the post-emancipation period of plantation production 
under colonialism. However, peasant-type activities were observed long before emancipation 
when under slavery (pre-1938 period) enslaved women and men grew most of their own 
food and were allowed to sell the excess in open-air markets. The small producer and family 
farming systems as we know them today were started after emancipation and located either 
on the peripheries of the plantations or on abandoned estates.  Some were established in 
the mountainous interiors – wherever ex-slaves could find land.  The now freed peasant 
workers had no choice but to continue to work on the plantations for cash, however, 
their orientations were to reject the plantation system of mass production, monoculture 
agriculture, and a dependence on foreign control.
The historical evolution of small producers and family 
farms
Marshall (1983) identified three stages of growth of the small farming system or the 
peasantry as he called it.  The period of establishment (1838–1850/60), during which there 
was a huge desire by emancipated slaves to acquire land and use the skill and knowledge 
they gained from working on the plantations to become independent cultivators. Land 
acquisition, however, varied from one Caribbean country to another.  In the smaller 
territories with well-established sugar plantations, such as Barbados, St Kitts and Antigua, 
there were fewer opportunities to access and purchase land.  On the other hand, in Jamaica, 
Trinidad, British Guiana, and the Windward Islands, there were greater opportunities for 
land acquisition and the establishment of small peasant farms.  
Secondly, there was the stage of consolidation which extended to the 1900s.  During this 
period, the monies earned from selling mainly ground provisions were used by the plantation 
labourers to purchase their own small farm holdings and become independent cultivators. 
Many small villages were established at this time and the small-scale farmers expanded 
their operations to include the production of crops for the export markets. As the small 
4 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
operators shifted into crop production for export, competition for land increased and land 
availability became somewhat problematic.  This was followed by a period of saturation – the 
third phase of the peasantry, which occurred in the post-1900 era.  The expansion of small 
independent farm operators could no longer occur within plantation-dominated societies, 
and in some places their numbers were drastically reduced.  At this time, relations with 
the plantation systems and structures were strained due to ‘real or perceived’ competition 
between the two for land, labour, and markets. 
Over the years therefore, the experience of colonization spawned two distinct but related 
agricultural sectors in the Caribbean. On one hand, there is the plantation sector and on the 
other, a system of small producers and family farms. The plantation sector is centred on 
commercial production of cash crops, while the subsistence sector of small producers and 
family farms mainly produced food for home use and for the domestic market, with some 
linkages to the export markets (Rajack-Talley and Talley 2000).  Because of the difference 
in scale of production, resource availability and use, as well as the monetary importance 
placed on export marketing, the plantation sector was cast in an industrial model and seen 
as the stronghold for development in the Caribbean.  Conversely, the small farmer or peasant 
was negatively depicted as a laggard, mainly because he/she lacked the land, finances and 
access to information and technology to produce at the plantation level.  
The historical accounts of the small farm development explain that the emergent peasantry 
did not consist of ‘slackers’ or ‘laggards’, but innovators who used the little resources they 
possessed and modified the traditional plantation system of production and economics. 
So for example, at the end of the 20th century when the traditional export, sugar, was 
threatened by European beet sugar, it was recommended by the British Royal Commission 
in 1982 and 1986, that plantation agriculture be diversified and small scale farming 
encouraged (Marshall 1985). Subsequently, there was some increase in domestic food 
production and diversification into alternative crops for export such as cotton in Antigua 
and Barbuda, Barbados, St Kitts, Nevis, and Montserrat; arrowroot in St Vincent; nutmeg 
in Grenada; cocoa, coconuts and citrus in Jamaica and Trinidad; rice in Guyana; and lime 
in St Lucia and Dominica (Greenwood and Hamber 1980). These alternative cash crops 
were first grown on small family farms, alongside the more traditional sugar cane, bananas 
and domestic food crops.  Many of these were later adopted by the larger plantations and 
considered important contributors to the GDP of different Caribbean territories. In a sense, 
agriculture diversification (which is once again being advocated) can be traced to the small 
farm holdings and family farms.  
Small farm production systems therefore posed challenges to the hegemonic importance 
of the plantation systems of production, as far back as these early times. Not only did the 
| 5
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
small farms provide the Caribbean with self-sufficiency in food production and food security, 
but they also supplemented the export trade markets. Both groups worked together for 
a time but the relationship soon became strained as the network of small producers and 
family farms grew. The competition between the two sectors for land, labour and other 
resources fiercely increased.  Over time, small farmers were not only a strong economic 
entity, but also a political force to be reckoned with.  For example, the West Indian Royal 
Commission reported that small farmers were responsible for the establishment of the 
Agricultural Society in Jamaica and the appointment of ‘travelling agricultural officers’ (the 
first group of agricultural extension officers).  Following on this, farmers’ cooperatives (e.g., 
Agricultural Societies, People Co-operative Banks, etc.), were established as farmers pooled 
their resources to buy land, build drains, and share labour costs on the farms.  The political 
sphere of their influence was further enhanced through the establishment of small villages, 
the expansion of farmers’ markets and the building of schools and churches.  In many ways, 
the activities of the small farming households converted plantation sites into indigenous 
communities and modernized societies throughout the Caribbean (Marshall 1983; Lewis 
1936; Mintz 1984).  In comparison, the colonial forces both at home and abroad, not only 
neglected small farmers as a group, but also gave them little resource support and even 
occasionally dealt with them with open hostility.  
The history of the small farmer in the Caribbean has been one of mixed perceptions 
and experiences.  While the networks of small producers and family farms were making 
significant economic, social, and political contributions to the sustainable development of 
Caribbean societies, government policies for a long time favoured the larger commercial 
agricultural holdings.  Small producers and family farms were treated with more of a 
palliative approach rather than reformative, particularly with matters of land settlement 
schemes, credit facilities, research, and extension services.  Over time, the lack of support 
and resources eventually took a toll on small producers and family farms and many were 
limited to production at subsistence levels, unable to compete with the large plantation 
systems producing ‘cash crops’ for the export markets. 
Characteristics of the small producer and the family farm 
Today, small producers and family farms persist with much variation in physical, financial, 
human, and social resources, including size of operations, land ownership and management. 
However, the following characteristics are commonly noted:  
• Small producers and family farms continue to co-exist alongside the plantation 
system of production;
• They have limited access to land and other resources;
6 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
• Farm lands are either owned, or rented/leased, shared with other family members, 
or illegally occupied (squatters) on government or absentee landlord-owned estates. 
It is also common to find farmers utilizing a combination of these different tenure 
arrangements;
• Farm size can vary, but small operations range from 0.2–2.0 ha.  There is also a 
group of landless farmers;
• Many farmers have separate plots of land that are dispersed, of different sizes and 
tenure arrangements; and not all the land is utilized at the same time;  
• Mixed farming is practiced, which incorporates a combination of crop production, 
livestock husbandry, forestry, artisanal fishery and small scale aquaculture;
• Some farmers practice agricultural diversification, producing food both for the home 
and the local markets, as well as for the export market;
• Farmers devote a major part of their time to cultivation using mainly their own 
labour and that of family members, with little paid help from non-family labourers. 
The primary farmer both manages the farm and is part of the farm labour;
The livelihoods of family members are dependent on the farm, but many rural households 
cannot depend entirely on agricultural production and combine income from the farm with 
cash earned from off-farm agricultural and non-agricultural activities.
Socio-Demographic characteristics of the small farmer
Information on the socio-economic description of the small farmer is not readily available 
but the common depiction is of an aged, predominantly male population.  This may be the 
case in many countries such as Jamaica for example, where the average male farmer is 
50–60 years old.  However, the census of agriculture data for many Caribbean countries 
record the small farmer as male, ranging in age from 41 to 54 years, while women farmers 
are recorded as comprising 30 percent of the farming population. In a few countries young 
people are becoming involved in farming, however in general, youth under the age of 25 
years show little interest and women under 35 are absent from the statistics as farm holders. 
Approximately, 50 percent of small farmers have some level of primary level education, 
20 percent have secondary school certification, and a few have post-secondary or tertiary 
education (FAO 2012).  These demographics are important when working with the small 
farmer as they help to determine the best form of communication, how to exchange 
information and technology, and overall, how to work with the farming families.  
Most farmers continue to access their information from informal sources, family members, 
other farmers, and based on their own experiences. They also talk with agricultural shop 
| 7
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
owners and extension officers.  Radio and to a lesser extent television programmes focused 
on aspects of farming, are also of interest to them.  More recently, farmers turn to their 
children to access the internet for information and research.  Interestingly, while it is 
common to hear farmers say that they do not want their children to follow in their footsteps 
and encourage and invest in their children’s education, they do engage their children in 
farming as part of a family business.  However, the family farming businesses of these small 
Caribbean farmers do not conform to your stereotypical business model.  As a result, it is 
often missed by professionals who argue that farmers need to change their approach and 
become more businesslike – rather than see the family farm  model as one of many different 
business models that can lead to sustainable development.
More often than not, farming offers an opportunity when all other doors are closed 
either because of lack of qualifications, job opportunities, or resources.  As a whole farmers 
comprise a mixed group of individuals.  Some are innovators, while others are less willing 
to change their traditional methods of farming.  Most admit that they enjoy farming, 
have a profound love and respect of the land, and take pride in having a keen sense of the 
importance of being able to produce food for family and country.
Are small farmers risk averters or risk takers?
Whether small farmers and farming families are innovators or traditionalist is best 
understood by examining the many reasons why they do not readily change their agricultural 
practices.  The most common factors include inadequate information and the lack of the 
requisite technical and financial resources. However, even when these are provided some 
farmers are still hesitant to adapt and improvise because they are not yet convinced that 
the risks associated with these ‘unproven’ ideas are worth taking chances.  Caribbean small 
farmers do have what has been described as an aversion to risk under uncertainty (Beckford 
2002).  Others also suggest that Caribbean small farmers exhibit the characteristics of risk 
appraisers and/or adoption appraisers (Beckford and Campbell 2013). There is however, 
one valid explanation for such behaviour that is usually missed by scientists and policy 
makers, that is, farmers exercise human agency in their decision-making, especially when 
the survival of their families is at risk. 
In most small farming households, families are highly dependent on food and income 
derived from agricultural practices that have sustained them for years, albeit at meagre 
or adequate levels. When new ideas are presented, it is imperative that farmers and their 
families appraise the risk of the situation and assess the possibilities of losing everything, 
along with the potential hunger and poverty that may result.  In other cases, the farmer and 
his/her family may also assess the ability of the household to avert any negative outcome 
8 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
and whether or not they can recover without going hungry and poor, if they fully adopt 
new ideas. It is because of these types of assessments that small producers and family 
farms have traditionally practised mixed farming and crop diversification.  If one product 
fails due to a disease, catastrophe in the market, or because of flooding and other natural 
disasters, they can rely on the other farm enterprise to feed and/or earn an income to take 
care of their families.
Farmers are very sensitive to the outcomes if their farming practices fail.  Beckford 
and Campbell (2013, 50) rightly link the small farmer’s ‘safety first mantra’ to years of 
experience of not having government and/or other institutional support and safety nets. 
Small cultivators are members of households and villages and are responsible for making 
rational decisions in the best interest of all.  Their methods of assessment before making 
decisions are seldom noted and widely misinterpreted as an inherent unwillingness to adapt. 
Farmers are not necessarily ‘diametrically opposed to innovations’ but they must first be 
convinced based on their own assessment that the recommended farming practices are safe, 
and the methods and technologies are both useful as well as affordable to the household 
budget (not just the farm), before they adopt (Beckford and Campbell 2013, 51).
As it relates to farming families on small farms, Le Franc (2006) has noted that there are 
other life threatening priorities other than economics. The hesitancy of farmers to change 
their practices should not be perceived simply as a cultural phenomenon.  They are known 
to make rationale choices as human beings and if they do not adopt what is perceived as an 
economically sound idea, it is often because they have not been convinced that it can work, 
and/or that there is a safety net to protect his/her family if it does not. If we give farmers 
human agency then the typecast of the unresponsive farmer and laggard will be rejected 
and the frustrations that researchers, scientists and policymakers experience when working 
with small producers and farming families, could possibly be resolved.  Equally important, 
we will be able to see clearly, why and how, small operations and family farming systems 
have been able to withstand the wrath of natural disasters and changing market demands, 
as well as positively view how many of their farming practices relate to food security and 
sustainable development. 
AGRICULTURE, SMALL PRODUCERS, THE FAMILY FARM, AND 
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Although the tourism, mining and energy sectors are seen as the mainstays of Caribbean 
economies, agricultural production has always been linked to the region’s economic 
development, export trade, and foreign exchange earnings.  Further, the livelihood of many 
| 9
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
families, particularly those who live in the non-urban or rural parts of a country continue to 
be dependent on farming and its link to industries and other activities.  The gross domestic 
product (GDP) from the sector has been on the decline, but agriculture still maintains a 
significant share of the overall GDP in some Caribbean countries.  The 2012 data from the 
World Bank show that the GDP from agriculture was as high as 21 percent in Guyana, 15 
percent in Dominica and 13 percent in Belize; and as low as seven percent in Jamaica and 
St Vincent and the Grenadines, six percent in Grenada, four percent in St Lucia, and two 
percent in Antigua and Barbuda, St Kitts and Nevis, and one percent in Barbados (World 
Bank 2014).
These figures however, do not give an accurate representation of the worthiness of the 
sector as they are calculated solely on the production records of primary commodities.  The 
Inter-American Institute for Co-operation on Agriculture (IICA) asserts that if we count the 
agricultural produce and by-products that are in the commoditized food chain supply, the 
GDP estimates in most countries are actually three to seven times higher (Trejos, Arias and 
Segura 2010).  Thus, current statistics that use traditional measures grossly underestimate 
and undervalue the sector’s economic contributions. On the other hand, if we assess the GDP 
from agriculture using the IICA-suggested method, we will get a more accurate reflection 
of the economic importance of agriculture to the region.  
Economic gains from agriculture however, are not only derived from GDP but also from 
the sector’s absorption of a large percentage of the adult workforce in many countries. 
Agriculture is the single largest employer in the world, providing livelihoods for 40 pe rc 
ent of today’s global population.  It is also the largest source of income and jobs for rural 
households. In the Caribbean, the agricultural sector accounts for close to 3.3 million 
agricultural workers, or 32 percent of the labour force in 15 countries including Haiti 
(Bourne 2008).1  Farmers make up about eight percent of the labour force in the least 
agrarian countries such as Trinidad and Tobago, but account for as much as 20–30 percent 
in countries like Belize, Guyana, Grenada, Dominica and Jamaica, which are more heavily 
dependent on agricultural production (Potter et al. 2004).  In addition, the sector offers 
employment opportunities in a wide range of different job categories and levels, including 
professionals who work as scientists in different fields, veterinarians, extension officers, 
teachers and a range of para-professionals.  Many others are employed in jobs attached to 
the forward and backward linkages in the food sector, especially in agro-processing and 
marketing businesses. 
1. 17 percent of the employed labour force if Haiti (or 1.1 million agricultural workers), is excluded from these 
statistics. Also, these statistics may have changed with the removal of protected markets for banana and 
sugar.
10 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
Although the agricultural sector as a whole may not be the dominant contributor to the 
GDP of some countries in the region, it does play a significant social role in providing steady 
employment, food provisioning, and as a source of income for many. The common position 
however, is that it is the export sector, consisting of the large plantation estates privately 
owned or operated by individual governments, that is of greater socio-economic importance 
and core to the development of Caribbean economies. This position is further supported by 
the idea that the plantation system of production is needed to compete on the ‘open’ and 
‘free’ market with plantations in Central America such as those owned by Chiquita and Dole. 
Conversely, the network of small farming systems were and still are, considered obstacles to 
a more modernized agricultural sector and the development of Caribbean societies. But can 
issues of food insecurity, poverty, malnutrition and hunger be resolved through large-scale 
commercial production of ‘cash’ crops? Moreover, can the UN’s call to support the family 
farm change the region’s long history of domination and dependency on male-dominated 
plantation systems of production, and the importation of food?
The importance of small producers and family farms to 
sustainable development
By 2050, the world population is expected to increase to nine billion people, with an 
accompanying demand for at least 60 percent more food. The FAO Assistant Director 
General, Latin America and Caribbean, is convinced that small scale farming can significantly 
contribute to meet this growing food demand (FAO 2012).  This projection is based on 
data for Latin America and the Caribbean which showed that small producers mainly on 
family farms accounted for more than 80 percent of agricultural production, 27 percent 
to 67 percent of total food production; and occupied between 12 percent and 67 percent of 
the agricultural land area.  Equally important, approximately 57 percent to 77 percent of 
all agricultural employment in the region was linked to small-scale agriculture production 
on these farms (FAO 2012).  These statistics are illustrative of how small scale farming on 
primarily family farm make economically and socially significant impacts to the region’s 
development. 
Economically they produce food items for their families, neighbours, and other villagers; 
for the small towns and larger cities; and for the local roadside vendors and domestic 
markets. Some family farms also produce crops for the export markets subsidising the 
sales from the large commercial estates. They also supply cross-border markets liaising 
with intermediaries, such as hucksters and higglers, in the food supply chain across the 
Caribbean seas. These small family-owned and operated farms are consistent suppliers of 
food because their livelihoods depend on it…it is what they do.  Family farming is a way of 
| 11
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
life and a way to live. They use all the resources available to them to feed their households 
and earn an income from the farm that can sustain a decent family life. Profits attained are 
shared between family and household needs.  Extra earnings are re-invested in the farm to 
improve production capacity.  In other words, the farm family is the main investor in the 
farm, even though the farm is not often referred to as a family business.
Since family members are the main source of labour, the farm is also a place of 
employment.  It not only sustains numerous rural household members, but creates jobs 
and is essentially a consistent source of inter-generational income.  Family farms therefore, 
not only provide the farming families with part (or all) of its food, but also guaranteed 
employment. Periodically they hire rural labourers on the farm and create link jobs in 
transportation, packaging, processing and marketing of their produce. Within this context, 
the well-established network of small producers and family farms generate social safety 
nets through direct and indirect employment of rural or non-urban populations, and the 
provisioning of food. 
Caribbean economies also benefit greatly from agro-industry businesses (food, beverages, 
tobacco, spices, etc.) that are important to their GDP earnings.  In Trinidad and Tobago 
for example, the 2004 data show that 3.1 percent of the country’s GDP was derived from 
the agro-industry sector and another 45.2 percent from manufacturing.  Ironically, this 
country is a net importer of food, as well as a net exporter of beverages, tobacco and other 
food exports.  While currently small producers are not the major suppliers for many agro-
industries they do have the potential, including the family labour, to transform certain 
products into by-products that add value to primary agricultural products. The region 
also has a long history of cottage industries in which women pre-dominate. The concept 
and practice of agro-processing is therefore very much alive in Caribbean culture and in 
the homes of farming families. Therefore investment in research, training, small business, 
credit, and sector linkages with agro-processing, are all worthwhile endeavours that can 
contribute to food security and sustainable development.
But development cannot be sustainable if the environment is not first protected.  The 
lay person travelling through the undulating terrain of many Caribbean countries sees the 
smoke on the mountainside and becomes aware of the ‘slash and burn’ practices of some 
farmers.  This image oftentimes is transferred to all small farmers.  However, it is more 
common to find that traditional farming families are the protectors of the environment and 
biodiversity.  According to FAO (2012), family farming systems are more inclined to use 
native varieties, conserve and practise soil improvement, and are less dependent on inorganic 
ameliorates (fertilizers, pesticides, etc.) and other hurtful chemicals. Furthermore, small 
producers and family farms have always practiced crop diversification, mixed farming and 
forestry – practices that mitigate environmental degradation.  
12 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
Nevertheless, little credence is given to small producers and farming families who have 
been the guardians of the environment, indigenous knowledge, and good agricultural 
practices.  By passing farming knowledge and traditions across generations, small 
producers and farming families have withstood the physical challenges usually associated 
with agriculture. Additionally, because their scale of operations is usually small, it is easier 
for them to respond to environmental impacts or changing market demands. The lack of 
resources and support means that their systems of farming may not always move production 
to high profit-making levels, but they do continue to provide food for families, and practice 
methods that are safe and sustainable. Interestingly, agricultural diversification is now being 
highly recommended for the region and the same methods of farming that small farmers have 
historically practiced are being touted as the ‘new’ approach for sustainable development. 
Lastly, small producers and family farms contribute to sustainable development because 
they stabilize the scattering of villages and small towns located throughout the countryside. 
Farmers either live on their farms or in nearby villages or towns.  Either way, the farming 
environs are not simply a place of production but a home to many farming families.  The 
network of small producers and family farms in any one location stimulates economic 
activities, create opportunities for small businesses, and sometimes successfully converts 
villages into small towns.  They balance rural and urban livelihoods, halt rural-urban drifts, 
and slow down outward migration from Caribbean countries.  Conversely, when settlements 
are stable they become valuable conduits for preserving and enhancing indigenous 
knowledge, traditions, and customs of local communities.   It is therefore imperative that 
small producers and family farms continue to make a livelihood and economically grow 
so that there is continuity and preservation of the culture of many rural communities and 
small towns. This contribution by small producers and family farms is often not valued or 
perceived as important to sustainable development (box 1.1).
In general, while small-scale operations and the family farming system present many 
advantages for food production, food security and sustainable development, the male-
dominated plantation production systems that rule the region are currently unsustainable. 
The revitalization of the small producer and the family farm, as well as the enhancement 
of women’s role in agriculture, will ensure the production of local vegetables, fruits and 
root crops, as well as the rearing of healthy animals. Small family farms will stabilize the 
production of staples for the region such as rice, yams and bananas, and provide less 
processed food products. Moreover, a highly productive peasant sector and family farming 
system will lead to expanded and/or steady employment, gender equity, healthier families, 
stronger communities and an overall strengthening of Caribbean economies. Core to these 
activities is the role of women in Caribbean agriculture.
| 13
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Box 1.1: Contribution of small producers and family farms to 
sustainable development
Small producers and/or family farms contribute to sustainable 
development because they: 
•	 Produce food for families, communities, and the local, regional and 
export markets;
•	 Are a constant source of employment for families, villagers, and 
income earners in linked activities; 
•	 Provide a safety net to generations of families including members 
of their communities;
•	 Protect the natural environment and biodiversity;
•	 Are more likely to use organic products and native species in their 
methods of farming;
•	 Practice agricultural diversification and mixed-method farming and 
can better respond to environmental and market changes;
•	 Are a source of indigenous knowledge and practices that are passed 
on over generations;
•	 Preserve traditions and local cultures;  
•	 Own their labour, farming business, and are free to make their own 
decisions;
•	 Stabilize rural communities and stimulate economic activities in 
villages and small towns.
WOMEN IN AGRICULTURE
The overall proportion of the economically active population (EAP) working in agriculture 
declined during the 1990s, but the percentage of economically active women working in 
agriculture at the global level remained at nearly 50 percent through to the twenty-first 
century.  While this percentage of women in agriculture is expected to decrease overall, 
the percentage of economically active women working in the sector in less developed 
countries (LDCs) is projected to remain above 70 percent (FAO 2006). The relatively high 
participation of women in agricultural work is due in part, to the greater involvement of 
rural male populations in off-farm employment, and/or the increase in male migration 
to urban areas in search of work.  As a result, more women assume responsibility for the 
family farm because they must provide food and income for their families to survive, along 
with or in absence of, their male partners. 
14 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
In the Caribbean, women are involved at all levels in the agricultural sector, including 
small scale production as individual farmers, on family farms, as farm labour on other farms 
and plantation estates, and in the marketing and processing of fresh foods. The number of 
women in agriculture varies from one Caribbean country to another as do the populations 
that are engaged in agriculture. However, in all cases, the contribution of women is highly 
underestimated in agricultural census data, which are confined to transactions in commercial 
cash crop production for the formal market sector. Information on the production and 
marketing of agricultural produce for local use where women are mainly found working, are 
left out of the agriculture data bases. Women also dominate the regional export food trade 
buying fruits, vegetables, and root crops directly at farm gate and exporting to neighbouring 
islands where they are sold in wholesale markets. For example, female hucksters and 
higglers from Grenada and St Vincent transact business in Trinidad and Tobago and 
Barbados, similar to other hucksters among the Eastern Caribbean countries. While there 
is some documentation of the regional trade, the participation of women hucksters is also 
not accurately represented in the agriculture labour force statistics.  
As a result, women in Caribbean agriculture are almost invisible in the statistics though 
highly visible as small farmers, on family farms, in local and regional markets, in agro-
processing plants, and in gender specific jobs on large commercial farms. When official 
statistics underestimate women’s participation in the agriculture sector, their contributions 
to domestic food supplies, households’ diets and incomes, as well as the national wealth of a 
country through agricultural work, are also undervalued. This creates a serious shortcoming 
in the proper planning for food production, food security and sustainable development.  
Historical roles
Caribbean women’s economic and social contributions to the agricultural sectors is not 
new but can be traced to their historical beginnings. Under colonization and the peak of 
the slave trade in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the plantation economies of 
Caribbean territories were well propelled by imported slave labour of both women and men 
from West Africa.  Sugar was one of the most valuable commodities on the market and slave 
labour was the cheapest resource for sugar production.  Enslaved African women played 
several roles that contributed to the economic life of the sugar plantations.  They provided 
labour in the cane fields and worked as domestics and nannies in the plantation houses. 
Slave labour then, was unpaid and women’s and men’s labour were exploited without any 
moral or ethical restrictions. Women and men performed the same tasks in the cane fields 
as there was no sexual division of field labour (Rajack 1991). 
| 15
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
What is less known about the roles of enslaved women is that outside plantation-related 
work, they were the primary producers and marketers of food within slave communities 
(Mathurin 2006; Reddock and Huggins 1988, 1997).  It was more profitable for the plantation 
owners to have the enslaved women and men produce much of their own food.  As such, 
even as they worked on the sugar estates, they also engaged in peasant-like activities 
cultivating subsistence food crops to feed themselves.  Because women were perceived as 
‘less dangerous’ than men, they were permitted to sell any extra food grown, at a common 
public market on Sunday mornings. The prevalence of women in the local market, and as 
hucksters/higglers in the municipal markets, is a continuance of the historical dominance 
of food markets by women throughout the Caribbean. 
With the ending of slavery in the mid-twentieth century, many of the enslaved African 
women retired from agricultural fieldwork with the hope of working in other non-plantation 
type jobs and/or becoming housewives and homemakers.  Very soon after, the downward 
wage pressure and rising food prices promoted large-scale migration of male ex-slaves in 
search of work in other countries. To fill the void, women once again moved into agricultural 
production on the plantations, as well as continued growing food to feed their families 
(Momsen 1991, 1993; Mintz 1974, 1984).  On the plantations, the freed African women 
were for the first time employed for wages but under a stringent gender division of labour 
that paid them lower wages than men.  By that time, a gender stratification of labour with 
differential pay for women and men had emerged under the system of indentured labour 
(Rajack 1991; Reddock and Huggins 1988, 1997).  The wages earned by women and men 
were so low, that they had to supplement their household incomes by growing some of 
their own foods and selling the extra produce in local markets, as they had done prior to 
emancipation. The women drew on their business experiences from selling in the open 
public Sunday markets and established themselves as the primary marketers in the internal 
food market systems of the region. 
In Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana, and to a lesser extent in other Caribbean countries, the 
abolition of slave labour led to the demand for indentured labour from India that was also 
under British colonization.  Within the indenture labour regime, women often carried out 
the same tasks as men – planting, weeding, hauling of trash, applying fertilizers, cutting, 
bundling and loading of the sugar canes.  The plantation owners however, paid women wages 
well below those of the men and justified the wage differential by categorizing women in the 
same group as ‘weakly’ men and boys.  In the early twentieth century, the average weekly 
wage was one dollar for men while women were paid wages that were one half to two-thirds 
that of men. The gender stratification of labour with wage differentials was carried over 
into the post-colonial period and adopted by the government-owned sugar companies of 
the Caribbean (Brereton 1983; Rajack 1991; Reddock and Huggins 1988, 1997). 
16 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
Women in contemporary Caribbean Agriculture
Today, women continue to work as wage earners primarily in labour-intensive jobs on 
the large estates cultivating sugar cane, banana, cocoa, coffee, coconut, citrus and other 
plantation crops. They are mainly hired on a seasonal basis for planting, weeding, and 
harvesting of certain crops and in post-harvest and processing of other produce for sale. 
Their low wages are normally justified by the job category of their work, similar to the 
application of labour stratification of the old plantation systems.  Nevertheless, the wage 
earned is an important source of income to many rural, low-income and poor households. 
Women’s participation in the production of ‘cash’ crops for the export trade contributes 
to the GDP that is derived from the agriculture sector.  However, because of the seasonal 
and/or part-time nature of their jobs, their participation is not accurately counted in the 
statistics on the agricultural labour force, which tends to exclude non full-time employees. 
Similarly, women dominate in the full production, post-harvest processing, and marketing 
of food crops for the domestic sector. Here again, because the domestic food sector is part 
of the informal economy it is not as regulated as the commercial production sector and 
data on women’s roles is absent.  Nevertheless, women’s most significant contribution to 
food production and food security lies in the roles they play on family farms.  There, women 
consistently engage in the provisioning of food for many homes, as well as for national and 
regional markets.  On the family farms women participate in all aspects of the productive 
cycle in both crop and livestock production, but there are some noticeable gender patterns 
in the division of labour by sex (Rajack-Talley and Talley 2000).
Box 1.2:  Sex versus Gender
 
The concepts of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ are sometimes wrongly used as the same 
and can be confusing. Sex refers to the innate biological categories of male or 
female. Gender refers to the social roles and identities associated with what it 
means to be a man or a woman. Gender roles are shaped by ideological, religious, 
ethnic, economic and cultural factors and are key determinant of the distribution 
of responsibilities and resources between men and women (Moser 1989). 
Being socially determined, however, this distribution can be changed through 
conscious social action, including public policy. Every society is marked by gender 
differences, but these vary widely by culture and can change dramatically over 
time. According to Quisumbing (1996), sex is biology and gender is sociological. 
Sex is also fixed and gender roles change.
| 17
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Women animal farmers 
Livestock production by women is an important component of their mixed farming 
practices or as an enterprise by itself. Women are more likely to engage in small animal 
production (e.g., sheep, goats, poultry, etc.), while men tend to be involved in large livestock 
production (e.g., beef cattle and pigs). Even when women participate in large livestock 
production such as raising dairy and beef cattle, they primarily engage in those activities 
that are associated with their stereotypical roles as nurturers, homemakers and mothers in 
the home (Rajack-Talley and Talley 2000).  For example, women are commonly found in 
activities that involve feeding, milking and/or taking care of young and sick animals.  As a 
general rule, the more ‘strenuous’ jobs are usually done by men, such as collecting forage, 
building pens, hoof trimming, and machinery operation. 
As livestock keepers in the Caribbean, women farmers are also managers of the poultry, 
sheep and goat and dairy farms. Ownership of small livestock is particularly attractive to 
women because it can be practised close to the home and allows for the balancing of domestic 
chores with farming activities (Rajack and Hosein 1993).2  Some of the animal products 
(e.g., eggs, milk, and meat) are used for home consumption, and part sold locally for cash 
income.  Sales usually occur at those times of the year when demand is high (e.g., Christmas 
and Easter) and/or when the household needs extra cash (e.g., at the beginning of the school 
year, for weddings and christenings). According to one farmer, ‘having a certain amount 
of sheep in my backyard is like having money in the bank for a rainy day’ (Rajack and 
Hosein 1993).3  The slow but steady outward migration of people from rural/non-urban 
communities has also resulted in a year round increase in the demand for basic food items 
including eggs, milk, poultry, and fish to feed burgeoning urban populations.  The poultry 
and small scale dairy projects managed primarily by women are therefore important in 
meeting some of the food needs of the family, extra income for family social events, as well 
as the periodic increase in consumer demands and growing urban populations.
To sustain such needs, women and men livestock farmers also need to expand their size 
of operations.  However, it is more challenging for women farmers because of the gender 
differential in access to resources, including land, labour, technology, credit and extension 
services. These gender-based inequalities exist although female-headed livestock enterprises 
have been shown to be as successful as male-headed livestock production farms.  Moreover, 
research has shown that on small family farms, shifts from subsistence to commercialized 
2. Research has shown that women’s participation in farming does not reduce their workload in the house.
3. Comment from a participating farmer in CARDI’s sheep and goat project. 
18 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
levels of animal production can result in conflict over control of the livestock businesses 
between male and female farmers on the same farm (Rajack 1996).   This is primarily 
because, in Caribbean societies, men are stereotyped as the main income earners and 
women’s income are considered supplementary to household budgets.  Consequently, 
there is no stress if women manage subsistence production, but if levels of growth results 
in major income earnings for the household, gender roles can become strained and the 
livestock enterprise a contested terrain.
If the farm operations of women are subsumed by male farmers on the same farm, or by 
other male-headed livestock enterprises, then women are more likely to become employees 
rather than managers and owners of their agricultural businesses. Thus, movement towards 
sustainable production of the livestock industry has gender consequences unless steps 
are taken to ensure that women farmers are not negatively impacted by commercialized 
production.  Further, because of where women livestock farmers direct their products, 
keeping women in livestock production also secures local food supplies as well as home 
consumption, nutrition, and single female-headed household budgets (FAO 2011).  
At the same time, caution must be taken not to paint women as helpless victims who 
are inevitably displaced as the livestock sector grows and develops. Women farmers do 
have agency and resist attempts to displace them or terminate their source(s) of income 
(Rajack 1996). Women, particularly in low-resource and/or female-headed households, 
understand the important role they play in providing basic food and other needs for their 
families, as they cannot afford to be financially marginalized in their homes. Generally, they 
also take great pride in feeding their community and society. Unfortunately, in livestock 
development projects the threat of women being displaced and their resistance to pending 
marginalization is too often missed by extension officers and animal scientists, as well as 
policymakers.  So too, are the related implications to sustainable production of meat, eggs, 
milk, and other animal products for local food demands. As a result, a concerted effort 
should be made to ensure that as the sector grows, women have access to the resources 
they need, and that gender implications are factored into sustainable development planning 
and livestock practices.  Some women may prefer to rear poultry and other small livestock, 
and find that these are more appropriate to their farm and family life. Others may want to 
venture or expand into larger scale operations or bigger animals and should be supported 
and provided with the technology, information, training and finances required. Moreover, 
there is a need to move away from the stereotypical beliefs that pigeonhole which livestock 
enterprise is more suited for women vis-à-vis men, and also the concept of the male as the 
livestock manager and the female as the livestock farmer and labourer.
| 19
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Women crop producers
A similar parallel is found in crop production where women produce all crop types in 
the domestic food sector, but there are gender-distinct crop enterprises, orientations and 
divisions of labour. Women participate mostly in planting, weeding, harvesting and post-
harvest crop activities. On the other hand, men tend to engage mostly in land preparation, 
application of agro-chemicals, and the use of farm equipment and machinery (Kleysen 
19964; Rajack-Talley and Talley 2000). As owners of their farms, women tend to have 
smaller plots of land, use fewer purchased inputs and their output is usually smaller. Yet, 
they still produce 60 to 80 percent of food in most developing countries, that is, half of the 
world’s food supplies (Momsen 1991; Mehra and Rojas 2008) because they concentrate on 
local food production for their households, communities, society and the region.  The food 
crops are grown on small family farms on which women are either farm managers, farming 
partners, farm family labourers, or farm wage labourers.  According to Rajack-Talley and 
Talley (2000), any analysis of the domestic food sector in the Caribbean is essentially an 
analysis of women’s role in food crop production.    
Overall, gender patterns in the division of farm labour are linked to women’s reproductive 
and other domestic responsibilities.  Studies have shown that size and life stage of a family 
influence the type of farm practice, level of involvement, and time devoted to agricultural 
work (Barrow 1986; Rajack-Talley and Talley 2000; Overholt et al. 1985; Sen 1981).   For 
example, women with young children elect to work close to or at home, and arrange all 
their farming activities so that they can accommodate their family needs. Accordingly, 
women without children (or adult children) have greater flexibility in terms of time, tasks, 
location, and the type of agricultural work they engage in. These gender distinct familial 
characteristics are important factors in farm and home management plans when working 
with farming families in food production for food security and sustainable development. 
Families in earlier life stages are more likely to be responsive to practices that are manageable 
and require women’s physical presence near or on the farm. The family farming system 
is therefore a more appropriate fit for these women and their families. Other women may 
need support in broadening their scales of operations and would require more land, most 
likely further away from a housing area, a different type of technology, more credit, different 
crops, and a management and marketing system that is more commercial in orientation.
4. See for example tables 1.10 – 1.11. 
20 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
Women farm managers
Interestingly, not only are there  gender patterns in the division of farm labour in both 
livestock and crop production, but there are also gender distinct farm management practices 
on small farm holdings.  A common trend observed is that on family farms women and men 
both engage in joint agricultural production and/or work and manage separate plots and 
enterprises.  Rajack (1996) observed these various arrangements and have identified four 
gender distinct models of farm management.  These are:
Separately managed enterprises:  Women and men are responsible for separate crops 
or livestock production. It is common for women’s agricultural projects to be located 
near to, or at home.  Decisions on each enterprise are made separately, although the 
couple usually discusses farming issues and help each other with the work.  
Same enterprise but separate tasks: In this management model, women and men are 
involved in the same crop and/or livestock production but participate in distinct tasks 
– stereotypically female and male jobs.  Under this arrangement, men are the major 
decision-makers and farm managers, while women are considered farm family labour. 
Discussions on farming issues are at a minimum level.
Shared tasks but not shared enterprise:  This farm management model is based on 
the understanding that both women and men can do the same tasks – not set gender 
distinct work.  The responsibility for all the farm enterprises is also shared. However, 
the male is considered the head-of-the-household and as such, is treated as the major 
decision-maker and farm manager. The woman farmer is not documented as being 
economically active in agriculture. In these situations, women may seek other forms of 
independent income generating enterprises such as in cottage industry.
Women or men managed enterprise and tasks:  In this model, the division of labour, 
decision making and farm management is simple.  It is all done by one or the other where 
one partner in the couple has very little to do with farming.  The person identified as 
the farmer (male or female) makes the agricultural decisions, performs the lion’s share 
of work and manages the farm.
Although there are no recent studies on women farm mangers in the Caribbean, what is 
known is that all four models exist within the region.  Past studies showed that although 
there are wide variations from one country to another, women as major farm decision-
makers can be as high as 47 percent and as joint managers with men up to 42 percent. 
Overall, where women perform most of the tasks in the farm enterprise they also tend to 
| 21
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
be the major decision-makers. Gender specificity was also observed in the types of farming 
decisions made by women.  For example, women participate more in decisions about what 
type of crop to grow or livestock to rear, how farm labour is to be organized, and where 
produce is to be sold (Kleysen 1996; Rajack-Talley and Talley 2000). 
Current research on gender distinctions in farm management practices and decision-
making are urgently needed. If the trend identified in earlier studies by Kleysen (1996) 
and Rajack (1996) hold steady, then the high numbers of women who make farm decisions 
(independently or jointly) and the types of decisions that they make have significant impact 
on:
• How information and resources (technology, labour, and finance) are allocated and 
managed on family farms; 
• What is produced and what methods of farm practices are adopted.
This data can be useful in assisting the farm family to better plan for improved food 
production systems and farm management, both of which are important in promoting 
sustainable development.
Women marketers and traders (Hucksters) 
In addition to pre- and post-harvest activities, marketing has always been an income 
earning activity historically performed largely by Caribbean women (Lagro and Plotkin 
1990; Mintz 1974). The custom of enslaved women selling the extra food that they were 
allowed to produce for themselves on the plantation in Sunday markets, rapidly expanded 
immediately after emancipation (Besson 2003).  As independent small producers and family 
farms were established, the common market outlets also expanded to now include sales at 
the farm-gate to hucksters or higglers, agents and middle men, and also directly to customers 
at the local domestic or retail markets.  Hence, contemporary patterns of marketing at local 
sites, huckstering or inter-island trading within and between the islands, sidewalk tray or 
‘fruit stand’ selling, are not new practices for Caribbean women. Currently, women are 
responsible for producing and selling between 12 to 50 percent of local foods, mainly fresh 
fruit and vegetables, root crops, some export crops such as bananas and rice, as well as a 
range of other non-traditional (cut flowers, ornamentals, etc.) export crops (Mantz 2007). 
In the Caribbean, Mantz (2007) identified three distinct forms of market vendors in which 
women predominate, namely marketers, higglers and hucksters.5  The women involved 
are self-employed individuals engaged in economic activities, encompassing bargaining, 
5. Men also participate in all three forms, but historically women dominate in each category of the marketing 
operations.
22 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
bartering, and selling of produce. The traditional market vendors sell their goods at 
centralized market locations, or at regular fruit stalls on the side of the road, or in an arcade 
of stalls.  Higglering occurs at street corners, busy intersections, or any high traffic where 
for example, there is road construction and a slowing down of traffic.  Both these forms of 
operations involve simple transaction of goods and are local/domestic marketing systems. 
The third category of women marketers are the hucksters.  In this group, women function 
more like entrepreneurs and are involved with inter-island trading that requires more than 
just buying and selling of goods but also the shipping of produce, travelling, and foreign 
exchange activities.  The economic roles of these women have never been captured, although 
they serve as important forms of providing food and generating economic activities. Mantz 
(2007) for example found that ‘huckstering’ by the predominantly Dominican women 
accounts for the second largest foreign exchange earnings for that country.  
These trading patterns continue to be under the aegis of women and are sustained 
with little or no capital from governments or the private sector, but from women traders, 
small producers, and family farms.  The trade requires the establishment of some level of 
relationship with clients and sellers, and must maintain a reputation for providing farm 
fresh and safe produce cultivated locally/regionally. Market selling is also a tenuous activity 
that requires high levels of financial competence, as well as negotiation and business skills. 
Pricing information is attained mainly via the radio, daily newspapers, telephone calls to 
current or potential customers, other marketers and agents.  The level of trade and capital 
exchange is often not recorded and thus undervalued, alongside the entrepreneurial abilities 
of women. 
Little research has been done on women traders but what is known suggests that it is a 
long-standing matrilineal vocation, in which marketing skills are passed from mother to 
daughter and other female members in the same family.  It is not unusual to find, aunts, 
nieces, sisters and others plying the same trade. Mantz (2007) describes this occurrence as 
‘women for women’ and a most a vibrant and self-sustaining economic activity. Although 
several hundred women remain committed to the trade, their numbers are shrinking for a 
myriad of reasons. Labour shortages and the education of young female family members 
are possible push factors away from a risky and difficult female business.  However, there 
is still an active movement among the islands of Dominica, Guadeloupe, Antigua, St Kitts, 
St Martin, and The Virgin Islands, St Vincent, St Lucia, Grenada, Guyana, and Trinidad 
and Tobago, among others. 
The socio-economic importance of the three categories of marketing activities at the local 
and regional levels has been seriously undervalued and unrecognized as a key link in the 
food security chain of the region.  Consequently market vendors, higglers and hucksters 
| 23
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
have not been given much support although they have managed to survive.  The lack of 
attention is due, in part to the fact that the activities occur in the domestic food systems of 
the informal economy, and also because they are ‘women’s’ activities.   Given the more recent 
downward trends, if these important food marketing systems are to be sustained, support 
is required to make the trade a viable one in which male (and female) marketers do more 
than just survive but make a decent income that can comfortably support a family.  Equally 
important, any kind of support provided should have a gender focus that involves women 
themselves in areas such as training, mentorship, and skills building, as well as methods of 
accessing credit and the conduct of business and financial transactions.  Only through this 
involvement and further research on the women will we be able to understand what are these 
gender specific ways that have worked for years. It will also provide recommendations for 
growth and development for women by women.  In other words, efforts must not only be 
focused on food marketing sustainability, but also on how women can remain the leaders 
of the trade.
Gender barriers
There is no doubt that women play crucial roles in food security for their homes, their 
communities, the domestic market, in the wider society in which they live, and across the 
blue ocean to others where fresh fruit, vegetables, root crops and other food items are 
scarce.  In the process they manage the natural resources and biodiversity of farmlands 
(FAO 2006).  Despite years of proven capabilities and contributions, many women small 
farmers are still unable to move from subsistence to more commercial forms of agriculture 
so that they can grow additional food to feed the region, and at the same time earn enough 
to comfortably support their families. They are prevented from doing so because they 
experience discrimination at two levels.  
 Firstly, as small producers focused on food crops, domestic livestock, and agriculture by-
products, women are not perceived as important as the larger cultivators who are producing 
for the export markets.  Consequently, women as small farmers are not given the type of 
resources and support as the bigger farmers and the plantation systems of monocultures. 
More recent, the food import crisis in the region has stirred governments, along with regional 
and international organizations to advocate for greater support for the farm family and its 
role in providing food for the region. But this is a recent initiative and will take a long time 
for resources to reach women and men small producers and farming families before their 
agricultural endeavours can become more desirable and economically viable.
Secondly, because of their gender, women farmers are exposed to the same gender 
discrimination present in mainstream society. Gender discrimination in the Caribbean 
24 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
is partly based on stereotypes founded on the Eurocentric notion of the role of women 
as housewives. The process of ‘housewifisation’ has led to gender specific tasks and 
responsibilities on the farm and a particular perception about women’s capabilities. Women 
are rarely thought of as farm managers and producers of export cash crops and livestock 
products.  Instead, they are viewed and treated primarily as farm labour and helpers to 
male farmers on peasant and family farms, and low-wage employees in packaging and 
processing of export products. 
This double subjugation of women farmers has restricted their access to agricultural 
resources and services such as land, credit, training, technical assistance technology and 
institutional support. Conversely, more resources are allocated to the export-oriented 
agriculture sector in which men typically own and/or are more actively employed. In 
particular, land distribution patterns are very uneven with respect to farm size, and this 
further limits women’s access to credit and other farming resources.  
As a result, compared to men, women farmers are more likely to: 
• Operate smaller farms, on average one half to two-thirds the size of men farmers;
• Farm on small and fragmented pieces of land either family-owned, rented or 
occupied without permission;
• Keep fewer livestock, typically of smaller breeds, and earn less from the livestock 
they do own;
• Have a greater overall workload that includes a heavy burden of domestic activities
• Have less education and less access to agricultural information and extension 
services;
• Use less credit and other financial services as most credit schemes favour middle 
to large farms in which men produce cash crops.  Consequently, they tend to draw 
on indigenous loan schemes such as ‘sub’ in Dominica, the ‘box’ in Guyana, and 
‘sou sou’ in Trinidad;
• Purchase less inputs such as fertilizers, improved seeds and mechanical equipment;
• Employed in part-time, seasonal, and low-paying jobs in which they receive low 
wages; 
• Receive less agricultural training, technology, extension services and technical 
assistance (less than 10 percent of women farmers are reported to receive these 
services).
| 25
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
According to FAO (2010, 3):
If women had the same access to productive resources as men, they could increase yields 
on their farms by 20–30 percent. This could raise total agricultural output in developing 
countries by 2.5 to four percent, which could in turn reduce the number of hungry people 
in the world by 12–17 percent 
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
As the region’s agricultural sector is integrated deeper into the global market it faces 
high trading competition for all its traditional ‘cash’ crops, as well as a burgeoning food 
import bill.  This can (and already has) stifled the Caribbean’s agricultural sector, both in 
the export markets and the local production of food in the domestic markets.  As a result, 
there is a steady decline in GDP earnings, farm household incomes, and wage employment 
in the sector overall.  Equally important is the social impact of this trend on the region’s food 
security due to the increase in reliance on external supplies for food and other agriculture 
related by-products.  If this pattern is not halted soon, then the argument made by Caribbean 
scholar George Beckford in the 1970s that the region will be in a state of ‘persistent poverty’ 
if it does not move away from the domination of the region’s agriculture by external forces, 
is still relevant today (Beckford 1972).  
Recently a similar proposal was made by FAO that 2014 be designated as the year of 
the farm family, and that the Caribbean should focus more on supporting small family 
farms rather than the larger systems of food production. Several meetings were held in the 
Caribbean during 2011 to discuss the region’s agricultural policies and food prices (FAO 
2012),6 at which participants more or less agreed with Beckford’s theory that the agricultural 
policies of the past favoured the larger private agricultural enterprises and neglected the 
small producer and the family farm. As a result, once the vulnerable and insecure plantation 
crop industries were placed on the ‘free and open market’ many farmers, particularly the 
banana farmers in Dominica, St Lucia, St Vincent and others were forced out of the market 
and placed several families in severe economic crisis. Consequently, large numbers of people 
migrated from the rural areas of the islands, and for a period of time, communities were 
being emptied of their populations.  Images of ‘padlocked’ homes of banana farmers who 
fled in search of other ways to make a living, were observed in small villages. The sugar cane 
6. Meetings were held in Santiago, Chile (June 7–8 ,2011) Port-of-Spain, Trinidad and Tobago (June 13–14, 
2011), San Salvador, El Salvador (June 15–16 2011), and Mexico City, Mexico (October 17–18, 2011). 
26 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
farmers and wage employees in the region’s sugar industry also faced a similar situation 
whereby farmers and employees in the sugar industry in St Kitts, Trinidad and Tobago, 
and other countries had to search for other sources of income to support their families. The 
impact of the collapse of the guaranteed export markets that traditionally supported many 
Caribbean households was also felt by the many villages and small towns that depended on 
the economic activities generated from these households. Businesses began to suffer and 
the economic and social life of these communities has since paused.  
Poverty studies conducted by the Caribbean Development Bank (CDB) in the last decade 
report on the impact of these shifts on poverty, particularly on the health, nutrition and 
education of farming families and rural/non-urban populations.7 Farmers are no longer 
able to support their family needs and as such there is a greater dependency on government 
assistance.  For women, many of whom historically played central roles in their families’ 
household budgets as farmers, small producers, and/or wage earners in commercial 
agriculture enterprises, not only are the survival of their families threatened, but also their 
economic independence. On a larger scale, these macroeconomic constraints experienced 
by small producers and family farms have directly impacted the region’s food production, 
food security and the sustainable development of every single Caribbean country.
Earlier discussions showed how small producers and family farms contribute directly to: 
(i) the sustenance of their families, neighbours and communities; (ii) employment generation 
for many; (iii) the production of food for local and regional markets; and (iv) the sustainable 
development of the region. Small producers and family farms make it possible for millions 
of people across the region to have access to fresh vegetables, fruits, root crops, fish, meat 
and other animal products.  In addition, they play an important part in the cultural customs 
and indigenous knowledge-base for generations of people. Collectively they have a multiplier 
effect in the creation of economic and social wealth in rural villages and small towns.  And 
yet, their modus operandi has been criticized because it is not primarily focused on profit 
making, but in providing a valued product and/or service based on family values rather 
than corporate values.  It is for this same reason that since colonization there has been 
a tendency for governments to support the male-dominated plantation systems centred 
on the production of ‘cash’ from crops and livestock, rather than on small producers and 
family farming systems.
Conventional agricultural education has also paid little attention to small scale farming 
including that of family farming systems.  Moreover, the information generated focuses 
7.  See Caribank.org
| 27
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
more on what does not work on these farms and less on their potential. What is taught to 
agricultural students about best practices is not positively linked to what is actually taking 
place on the farm. Similarly, agriculture census collect data on size of farm and what is on 
the farm; gender-disaggregated data is absent and a proper understanding of the systems 
that farmers use that are safe, sustainable and can be enhanced, is also missing.   As a result, 
small producers and family farms are associated with subsistence production, and as such 
patronized as recipients of government assistance.  Thus, parents themselves encourage their 
sons and daughters to become educated and leave farming and at the same time, hope that 
the family farm will remain as a family owned enterprise that has existed for generations – 
providing food, incomes, and self-employment. They know that circumstances beyond their 
control make this hope difficult and some changes are needed.  Women are particularly 
strong-minded about keeping the family farm because it allows them to provide some of 
their family dietary needs, and have an independent source of income without having to 
leave the farm and the home. 
There is no doubt that the region’s food production systems, food security and the 
sustainable development of villages, towns and societies are heavily dependent on the small 
producers and the family farms of the Caribbean. However, because of years of neglect, 
negative stereotyping, and lack of support from government policies as well as agricultural 
research, education, technical and extension services, many have fallen below, or are at 
subsistence levels of production, others have simply migrated entirely out of agriculture.. 
Strengthening small producers and family farming
To strengthen the small producer and the family farming system we need to fully 
understand the nature of the farmer, the family, the systems of production, gender issues 
and the rationale behind the farming practices adopted by the small producer and the farm 
family unit. Participatory research and development (PRD) approaches have been found 
to be the most suited to collect and analyse this information along with the farming family. 
The process can be a dialectical one in which the scientists/extensionists collects data and 
at the same time disseminate information that can help the small-scale food producer to 
enhance her/his adaptive capacity and resilience. Through the PRD process the farming 
members can become architects of their own farming practices and farm management. 
Data collected from PRD can be used to inform policies and national investment decisions 
that can revitalise family farming and enhance the role of women farmers. Further, the 
following recommendations are made that may be interrelated and therefore not exclusive 
or exhaustive. 
• Increase access to and control over productive resources, including land (tenure), 
water, credit, technology and extension services; 
28 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
• Additional agricultural biodiversity support for plant and livestock materials that 
can strengthen the resilience of local food systems and ensure food safety;  
• Closer linkages between what farmers are producing and the nutritional value 
recommended by the Caribbean Food and Nutrition Institute (CFNI);
• Improve local and regional food markets and place them under the control of small 
producers and family farms. Designs of systems should collectively evolve from 
farmers, scientists, marketers and consumers so as to provide high quality food 
from farmers that are accessible to all;
• Engage in more collective use of resources and lobbying (because of economies 
of scale) through establishing or strengthening farmers’ organisations and co-
operatives;
• Strengthen the organizational skills, financial accountability and economic viability 
of individual farm enterprises as well as farmers’ groups so that in the long term 
the management of certain support services can be transferred from governments 
to farmers and their organizations; 
• Work with farmers to develop a system of direct financing tailored towards farm 
families, small producers, and women farmers.  Thus, specific credit lines will be 
established to support self-managed funds of individual farming enterprises as well 
as for farmers’ organisations and co-operatives;
• Continue enhanced vocational training for farmers, women and rural youth in all 
areas of food production, food security and sustainable development is required. 
Training should include entrepreneurship skills and innovative technologies, but 
should be in harmony with what is already being practiced on the farm and within 
the families.  This includes how to include young women and men in modern farm 
technologies and social media that can enhance small producers and family farms 
without adding high risks, real or perceived.  Farmer to farmer training methods 
has proven to be most appropriate and should be readily adopted;
• Provide socio-economic safety net packages to small producers and family farms 
that protect then from the repercussions of natural disasters, failed new methods 
of farming, as well as change in market demands. This should include remittances 
to reinvest in farming activities as well as for meeting the needs of households and 
families. 
| 29
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Gender specific recommendations
While all the recommendations discussed above should be gender sensitive, gender 
specific considerations and recommendations are also suggested.  Currently, most national, 
regional and international food production policies and plans included addressing gender 
issues and women’s role in agriculture.  However, invariably these are included as add-ons 
and/or treated as separate concerns and solutions.  By themselves, they fail to address the 
differences in the resources available to men and women, their roles, the constraints they 
face – and how these differences might be relevant to proposed interventions for women 
farmers.  It is also assumed that interventions in areas such as technology, extension services, 
credit, infrastructure, and market access will have the same impacts on women as they do for 
men, when in fact they do not. As a result, the following gender specific recommendations 
are suggested that can enhance women’s full participation in food production and food 
security strategies: 
• Increase efforts to collect and analyse gender disaggregated data in order to 
understand role differences in food and cash crop production as well as men’s and 
women’s differential managerial and financial control over production, storage and 
marketing of agricultural products;
• Ensure that women have equal opportunities as men to own land, have access 
to agricultural services, including technology, farming incentives, training and 
extension. Equally important too, is that these services and resources should be 
tailored to meet women’s specific farming needs; 
• Focus on appropriate inputs and technology that can ‘free up’ women’s time on the 
farm and in the home so that they can balance their domestic responsibilities with 
farming activities; 
• Link what is grown, sold, processed or prepared for the home to the nutritional 
status of families especially children, as well as the general population;
• Review government policies and re-orient them to ensure that all constraints to 
women’s roles in food production and in food security are addressed.  This includes 
access to resources and services for women managed farms, as well as better 
employment and income earning opportunities for women with equal pay and social 
benefits linked to family care taking;
• Support and encourage women’s organizations and networks. Include representation 
from these groups at all levels of planning, training, decision-making and policy 
formulation that relate to small producers, family farms, and women farmers.  
30 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
REFERENCES
Atangana, E. 2012.  The Role of Smallholders in Sustainable Agriculture. Presentation at a 
Side Event at the Rio + 20 Conference, June 21, 2012, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Barrow, C. 1986.  Caribbean Women, Agriculture and the Family. Paper Prepared for the 
UNESCO/ISER (EC) Seminar on Changing Family Patterns and Women’s Role in the 
Caribbean. Cave Hill, Barbados: UWI.  
Beckford. G. 1972. Persistent Poverty: Underdevelopment in Plantation Economies of the 
‘Third World’. Jamaica: The University of the West Indies Press.
Beckford, C. 2002. Decision-making and Innovation among Small-scale Yam Farmers in 
Central Jamaica: Dynamics, Pragmatic and Adaptive Process. The Geographical Journal 
3, no. 168:248–59.
Beckford, C., and D.R. Campbell. 2013. Domestic Food Production and Food Security in 
the Caribbean: Building Capacity and Strengthening Local Food Production Systems. 
NY: Palgrave/MacMillan.
Besson, J. 2003. Gender and Development the Jamaican Small-scale Marketing System: 
From the 1960s to the Millennium and Beyond.  In  Resources, Planning and 
Environmental Management in a Changing Caribbean, ed. D. Barker and D.M.F. 
McGregor, 11–37. Jamaica: The University of the West Indies Press. 
Bourne, C. 2008. Perspectives on Enhancing Sustainable Growth and Development of 
Caribbean Agriculture. Keynote address by Professor Compton Bourne, President, 
Caribbean Development Bank, 44th Annual Meeting of the Caribbean Food Crops 
Society, Miami, Florida.
Food and Agriculture Organization. 2006. Agriculture, Trade Negotiations and Gender. 
Prepared by Zoraida García with Contributions from Jennifer Nyberg and Shayma 
Owaise Saadat, FAO Gender and Population Division. Rome: United Nations – FAO. 
———. 2010. The State of Food and Agriculture 2010–2011: Women in Agriculture, Closing 
the Gender Gap for Development. Rome, Italy: FAO/WFP.
———. 2011. The State of Food and Agriculture 2010–2011: Women in Agriculture – Closing 
the Gender Gap for Development. Rome: United Nations FAO publications.
———. 2012. Report of Workshop on Small-scale Farming in the Caribbean Held within 
the Context of the FAO Medium Term Strategic Framework for Cooperation in Family 
Farming in Latin America and the Caribbean 2012–2015, St John’s, Antigua. 
Gomes, P.I. 1984.  Some Notes on the Small Farmer in the Anglo-Caribbean. In Small 
Farmers in the Caribbean and Latin America, ed. Ronald Parris. Centre for Economics 
and Social Studies of the Third World/United Nations Educational and Scientific and 
Cultural Organization. Paris: UNESCO.
| 31
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Greenwood, R., and S. Hamber. 1980. Emancipation to Emigration. London: Macmillan 
Education Ltd.
Kleysen, B., ed. 1996. Women Small Farmers in the Caribbean. Washington: IDB/IICA.
Lagro, M., and D. Plotkin. 1990. Women Traders in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines: 
The Agricultural Traders of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Grenada, Dominica 
and Saint Lucia. Consultant Report. Port-of-Spain, Trinidad: UNECLAC.
Le Franc, E. 2006. Social Structure, Land Use, and Food Availability in the Caribbean. 
http://www.unu.edu/unpress/food/8F034E02.htm. Accessed January 23, 2014.
Lewis, W.A. 1936. The Evolution of the Peasantry in the British West Indies, Colonial 
Office Pamphlet.
Mantz, J. 2007. How a Huckster Becomes a Custodian of Market Morality: Traditions of 
Flexibility in Exchange in Dominica. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power 
14:19–38.
Marshall, W.K. 1985. Peasant Development in the West Indies since 1938. Rural 
Development in the Caribbean, ed. P.I. Gomes, 1–15. NY: Saint Martin Press.
Mathurin, M.L. 2006. A Historical Study of Women in Jamaica: 1655–1844. Jamaica: The 
University of the West Indies Press.
Mehra, R., and M.H. Rojas. 2008. Women Food Security and Agriculture in a Global 
Marketplace. Washington, DC: International Center for Research on Women (ICRW). 
Mintz, S.W. 1974. Caribbean Transformations. Chicago: Aldine Publishers.
———. 1984. From Plantations to Peasantries in the Caribbean. Washington, DC: Latin 
American Program, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
Momsen, J. 1991. Women and Development in the Third World. London/NY: Routledge. 
———. 1993.  Women and Change in the Caribbean. London: James Currey Ltd. 
Moser, C. 1989. Gender Planning in the Third World: Meeting Practical and Strategic Gender 
Needs. World Development 17, no. 2.
Overholt, C., et al., eds. 1985. Gender Roles in Development Projects: A Casebook.  USA: 
Kumarian Press.
Potter, R., D. Baker and T. Kalak. 2004. The Contemporary Caribbean. Boston, MA: 
Prentice Hall.
Quisumbing, A.R. 1996. Male-female Difference in Agriculture Productivity: Methodological 
Issues and Empirical Evidence. World Development 24, no. 10:1579–1595.
Rajack, T.A. 1990.  Extension Planning for Women in Agriculture as it Relates to National 
Agricultural Policies. In Women and Development Studies on Alternative Strategies 
for Agricultural Development: An Analysis of Women and Gender Issues. Proceedings 
of the Fourth Multi-disciplinary Seminar, UWI, St Augustine, Trinidad. 
32 |
The Role of Small Producers, Family Farms and Women Farmers in 
Sustainable Food Production and Food Security
———. 1991. The Historical and Contemporary Role of Female Sugar Cane Workers in 
Trinidad.  MPhil Thesis, Department of Agriculture Extension, The University of the 
West Indies, Trinidad.
———. 1996.  Neither Peasant nor Proletariat: The Paradox of Development for Caribbean 
Women and Men in Peasant Households. PhD dissertation, Department of Sociology, 
The University of Kentucky, USA. 
Rajack, T.A., and A. Hosein. 1993. Social/Gender Experience in the CARDI/CIDA Caribbean 
Sheep Production and Marketing Project. Proceedings from the Regional Small 
Ruminant Workshop, Barbados.
Rajack-Talley, T.A., and C. Talley. 2000. The Role of Farming Women in Caribbean 
Agriculture: A Historical and Contemporary Perspective. Caribbean Journal for 
Agriculture and Natural Resources 2, no. 2:4–13.  
Reddock, R., and J. Huggins. 1988.  The Case of the Sugar Industry in Trinidad and Tobago. 
In Caribbean Women in Agriculture. Rome, Italy: FAO.
———. 1997. Agriculture and Women’s Place: The Impact of Changing National Policies on 
Women’s Agricultural Work in Trinidad and Tobago. In Gender: A Caribbean Multi-
disciplinary Perspective, ed. Elsa Leo-Ryne, Barbara Barley and Christine Barrow, 
324–48. Jamaica: Ian Randle Publishers. 
Trejos, R., J. Arias and O. Segura. 2010.  More than Food on the Table: Agriculture’s True 
Contribution to the Economy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American 
Agricultural Economics Association, Denver Colorado.
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 2011. World Economic and 
Social Survey Report, 2011: The Green Technology Transfer. E/2011/50/Rev.1 ST/
ESA/333.
World Bank. 2014. Data. http://data.worldbank.org/.  Accessed February 15, 2014.
| 33
Youth: Adding Value to 
Agriculture in the Caribbean
Nicole Webster and Wayne G. Ganpat
INTRODUCTION
The average age of farmers in the region is estimated to be over 50 years 
with some countries averaging over 60 years. The drudgery, hard work and 
little financial rewards associated with agriculture seem to be the major 
deterrents to young persons entering the sector. This perception of the 
sector as not being profitable has been actively promoted by many successful 
farmers, who for reasons of tax evasion  and concessionary treatment, 
proclaim a litany of woes and do all in their power to discourage new 
entrants. While several initiatives have been tried in the region to reverse 
this situation, the problem still persists and has now become more urgent.
We live in a changing world that has the ability to provide the youth of 
today a life incomparable to their ancestors. They have access to educational 
systems that prepare them to be forward thinkers, access to resources that 
can provide them a sense of financial security, and technology that puts the 
world at their fingertips.  Despite this plethora of resources and access, many 
youth across the globe will never have a taste or a glimpse of this life.  Their 
lives will be shaped by a more dismal side of life that plagues over three 
quarters of youth living in developing countries (Bennell 2007; World Bank 
2006).  These youth experience successes and failures due to the political 
frameworks and bureaucratic arrangements in society.  There is however, 
the opportunity to challenge these conditions through policies and actions 
that deepen the context of living for youth, especially those who live in the 
rural bellies of society.  
 To a large extent, the successes and failures in rural communities across 
the globe are shaped by agriculture. Typically, one thinks of agriculture 
as the bread of life for rural communities because of its ability to provide 
C H A P T E R  TWO
Youth: Adding Value to Agriculture in the Caribbean
and sustain individuals.  Agriculture has multiple objectives such as creating employment 
opportunities, providing raw materials for agro-based industries, ensuring self-sufficiency 
in food production and food security, servicing of balance of payments, and contributing 
to the gross domestic product (GDP) (FAO 2002; Young et al. 2001).  In some cases, it is 
the backbone of society and determines the standard of living for large segments of the 
population. Increasingly agriculture is being viewed through the climate change prism 
wherein there is significant support for its role in mitigation.  For youth, especially those in 
rural areas, agriculture is a way of life.  As such, development experts have suggested that 
training and programmes should be targeted towards them early in life so that these future 
farmers may develop critical skills related to new practices, and as adults, will generally be 
more receptive to the changing face of agriculture. Early exposure will provide youth valuable 
skills and help them acquire experiences in group processes that will enable them to easily 
step into adult leadership roles in their communities as part of peoples’ participation in 
activities that contribute to sustainable agricultural and rural development.  
 This chapter is positioned from a context of change and empowerment for youth 
engagement in agriculture across the Caribbean region.  We contend that in order for young 
people to be fully integrated in society, they must be given the resources to become fully 
empowered for productivity.  Based on an analysis of rural youth agricultural programmes 
across the globe and the formal reports of Caribbean youth leaders, a model for engagement 
is proposed. Because of the diversity in the region, a flexible rather than a fixed model is 
suggested, with each country being able to choose from the essential components to make 
its own model.  Using this approach, we believe that the face and more importantly, the 
productivity of agriculture can be changed. For this to happen however, young people within 
the Caribbean must be supported by appropriate, sustainable interventions that allow them 
to fully engage the sector.
AGRICULTURE IN THE NEW MILLENNIUM
The changing face of the twenty-first century must incorporate the new faces of the 
millennium. Policies and practices must speak to the immediate and long-term needs of 
youth.  They are the future and must be given a template that challenges the status quo 
and converts theory into practice with a new-world twist.  This systematic approach to 
programming will assist in developing the farming community and agriculture for the next 
generation.  Of the nearly one billion youths between the ages of 15 and 24, approximately 
85 percent are from low income countries (Bennell 2007; FAO 2005; ILO 2005), where 
numerous problems such as inadequate housing, sub-standard health care, pollution, food 
| 35
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
deficits and deficiencies, rural to urban migration, and high unemployment rates plague 
the society (Deshingkar 2004). This current situation leads us to believe that it will be 
difficult to attain sustainable development under such conditions; however, a change is 
possible if policies and programmes are structured to systematically address these problems. 
For example, in Africa, nearly 200 million young people are waiting to be educated and 
prepared for employment.  In the Caribbean, Asia, and the Pacific we find a similar situation, 
whereby youth, especially the rural population on the fringes of society, are last to receive 
the assistance and support from society.   Among all these regions of the world, it has been 
estimated that the number of rural youth will continue to rise at exponential rates (ECLAC 
2008).  Unless addressed, today’s problems will continue to plague the rural segments of 
society at ever increasing rates.  
Youth and agriculture
Youth, in one sense, can be seen as a collective group of people who have the potential to 
change the world. Despite their age, gender, and geographic location, they have a unique 
way of approaching life; from a fresh perspective and with zeal. However, due to financial 
and social barriers for example, many are not given the opportunity to create change or see 
change happen.  For youth in the rural context, especially those in the agricultural sector of 
society, they are often left out of the equation for development and change. Young people 
find themselves sitting at the fringe of society looking on as others define their potential. 
Their lack of access to educational opportunities and limited voice in society are roadblocks 
to success.   
Rural agriculture and youth 
The United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) 
estimates that roughly 30 percent of Latin America’s populations are located in rural areas 
(ECLAC 2008).  This astonishingly low figure, translates into an awareness of the needs of 
this vulnerable population, and rural squatter camps and slums found within the region 
support a life of hardship for its inhabitants. Rural people, especially the rural poor in 
developing countries, depend heavily on agriculture as a means of subsistence.   Research 
has shown that between 75 and 85 percent of the rural population in Asian and African 
countries is engaged in agricultural production (Godfrey 2005).  Although these numbers are 
slightly higher than one would find throughout the Caribbean and Latin America (nearly 50 
percent throughout the region), the agricultural sector makes an important contribution to 
the GDP in many countries in this region. Even more important, is the impact of agriculture 
on the quality of life of individuals who live in these communities, including rural youth.  
36 |
Youth: Adding Value to Agriculture in the Caribbean
The ability to keep rural youth interested in living and working to sustain a quality of life 
is non-negotiable in today’s world, and involves the creation of a blueprint of policies to 
improve inmpoverished conditions. Funding must be provided, and the level of resources 
available must be improved to deliver a higher quality of life.  Policies regarding rural youth 
must be specific with clear strategies and guidelines to keep them from remaining on the 
fringes. In addition, in situations of limited resources, as is the case with most Caribbean 
countries, the funding made available to meet their needs and solve their problems must be 
used in an efficient manner.  While these issues are significant, what is even more important 
to the development of rural youth, is addressing the changing face of agriculture and farming 
that confronts this present generation.  
Rural youth in the Caribbean context
In the Caribbean as in many other developing countries, while the population of farmers 
is becoming smaller, the average age of farmers in increasing, and the rate of replacement of 
older farmers by younger ones is not the same as in the past.  Moreover, many countries have 
dwindling extension services to support farmers, both young and old, while simultaneously 
budgets are being redirected to support other programmes deemed more important. 
Youth in agriculture programmes are therefore not given the attention that is required. 
Under the circumstances with these challenges a decrease has been observed in the size of 
local and national economies, something which impacts the quality of inputs, agricultural 
production, staff and particularly extension and training for farming communities.  Rural 
youth agricultural programmes that focus on building leadership skills and agriculture 
knowledge, and reinforcing critical thinking and moral development suffer curriculum and 
staff cutbacks.  There has also been a discontinuation of financial incentives to stimulate 
and support youth involvement. 
Moreover, the non-formal educational component which has been a staple component in 
rural agricultural learning is often not given the adequate attention it deserves in order to 
meet the needs of rural youth.  The lack of staff, resources, training, and funding hinders 
the total growth and development for rural youth, and while these issues may be seen as 
formidable challenges for governments to overcome, they can be improved in the short to 
medium term.  In this discussion, the essential components of a model for the constructive 
engagement of young people are being suggested.   It is hoped that this will assist the youth 
to become more engaged in the agricultural sector as productive constituents empowered 
by facilitating policies and organizations, thus enabling them to utilise modern technology 
in a business-like manner to achieve economic independence. At the same time, they will 
also become vested citizens in society helping to address societal issues such as criminal 
activity, poverty and economic destabilization.   
| 37
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
TRANSFORMING YOUTH 
Transformational learning as defined by Hart (2006) is regarded as the intersection 
between service learning and critical pedagogy. Students learn to analyse their civic 
attitudes, assumptions, and actions through political, economic, and social conditions and 
inequalities that exist in everyday life.  Daigre (2000) contended that young people engaging 
in transformational learning must begin by problematizing the power structures they 
experience in their community, and to a larger extent in society and should be encouraged 
to ask critical questions about the implications of these structures. One practical way 
students can analyse power structures is by re-examining the formal classroom versus the 
informal classroom structure. Instead of viewing schools as the keeper and disseminator 
of knowledge, students work to solve problems and become engaged as agents of change in 
their communities.  In this way they become both leaders and teachers helping to change 
the society in which they live.  Young people are in positions to transform ‘facets of school 
life that may have served to alienate and oppress students’ (Hart 2006). 
 As young adults and youth become aware of concepts of leadership and change, 
they should then also begin examining how to create meaningful change.  Only through 
an examination of these structures will students begin moving toward a true appreciation 
for agriculture (Hart 2006). For example, students who live in communities with rampant 
poverty could learn to openly create spaces with politicians, community leaders, social 
policy, and media messages to find solutions for the problem. For this to happen however, 
youth relationships with agriculture must be actively supported by opportunities within 
the current infrastructures and powers that exist. 
 To facilitate the inquiry of change, youth and communities must re-frame the inquiry 
from the individual to the systemic (Bickford and Reynolds 2002). For example, when 
investigating issues of participation in agriculture, youth should re-frame, ‘what can this 
do for me?’ to a state of ‘what can I offer to this?’  Similarly, Daigre (2000) advocated for 
the analysis of the root cause of social problems by questioning the current political system 
and the social injustices embedded within them. Youth must be encouraged to look for the 
links between the entrenched institutional systems and how these impact their present 
position. Just as imperative as questioning the political systems, students must also learn 
to critically analyse their personal role in the system (Freire 1998).  Hart (2006) suggested 
that youth must constantly reflect on stereotypes and assumptions they may have about 
the population they are serving, how their individual actions affect power dynamics, and 
how their work connects to the larger political and social structures. This is essential for 
youth to make a difference in any sphere, more so in the area of food production.
38 |
Youth: Adding Value to Agriculture in the Caribbean
Youth engagement approach: Youth making a difference 
(YMD)
In order to effect a true change in the lives of rural youth, especially those engaged in 
agriculture, the central thesis of the discussion posits that there must be a rethinking, a 
paradigm shift in how we view youth in these areas. Youth must now be seen as viable 
individuals who have the ability to meaningfully contribute to the fabric of society.  They 
have the ability to think, develop and act in a way that can cause serious change. They must 
not be treated as outcasts of the society, but rather as individuals who, when given the 
opportunity along with the correct tools and resources, and with sincere, meaningful support 
and guidance, can make a difference. They can, if their potential is properly directed, add 
tremendous value to agriculture. The YMD approach also makes some basic assumptions 
about government and its position on youth and agriculture.  These include:
1. Promoting youth in agriculture high on the agenda of national governments.
2. Full commitment by governments to providing the funding and resources needed 
for youth development and agriculture.
3. Incorporating youth and agriculture as key aspects of their plans of work. 
4. Setting realistic goals and benchmarks to measure development.
5.  Including youth voices in the vision for agricultural development.
6. Viewing youth as part of the solution and not the problem. 
These points, juxtaposed against our vision of youth engagement can lead to a paradigm 
shift in the way we approach programming for rural youth involved in agriculture.
An analysis of selected agricultural youth programmes
A review of several programmes across the Caribbean, Latin American, and the West 
African region reveals that most youth agricultural programmes within rural regions focus 
on building skills and moral development.  Many programmes are grounded in developing 
positive character development and morals through Christian-based activities, such as the 
Young Boys and Girls Programme of Kenya.  These programmes primarily focus on young 
people between the ages of eight and 18 who are still living with their parents.  Young 
people attend day camps or after-school activities, which are monitored and/or facilitated 
by an adult.  The take away message for youth involved in these programmes appears to 
be that in order to make it in life, one needs to be a good citizen. No emphasis is placed on 
building agricultural or leadership skills, as is the case in other youth programmes in the 
more tropical regions of the world.  
| 39
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
The 4-H Model and Grassroots Efforts
Among many Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries, the thrust of youth 
development programmes is built on the US model of 4-H.  While the basis of this model was 
created to train rural youth throughout the United States in the early 1800s in agricultural 
production and canning, the format has morphed into a program for engaging youth 
in positive activities in the twenty-first century.  This programme provides youth with 
opportunities to build important skills such as leadership, communication, and character 
building.  The overwhelming majority of these experiences are embedded within a non-
formal educational framework to allow for flexibility and making the youth voice heard. 
Within the LAC context, the 4-H model entails a number of key characteristics of the US 
model, while embracing local culture and context.  For example, the curriculum is translated 
into local languages and is often tailored to meet the specific needs of the targeted youth. 
While these activities focus on the overall development of the youth, many do not incorporate 
the agricultural knowledge needed to thrive in today’s agricultural industry, perhaps as a 
result of the institutionalization of 4-H in society.  In some cases, countries incorporate 4-H 
as fully funded and supported programme within a Ministry (i.e. Ministry of Education or 
Ministry of Agriculture), while others treat it as a stand-alone programme that requires a 
cast of dedicated volunteers and funding for support.  Because many young people view the 
4H programme as a school activity, very few make the transition to becoming full-fledged 
members of the farming community.
An offshoot of the 4-H model have been the grassroots efforts observed in countries such 
as Jamaica and Barbados, where concerned individuals who see the need to educate the 
young while preserving culture and agriculture, have started local programmes for youth, 
which involve bringing youth onto their farms to teach them about agriculture and its benefit 
to themselves and their country.  These programmes, which also have a mentorship aspect, 
teach young people about farming practices that are sometimes seen as traditional, but yet 
are being promoted by scientists in classrooms in other parts of the world as sustainable 
methods.  Fundamental to this type of programme is recognition of the benefits to be derived 
from engaging youth in a waning industry, while also teaching them about a culture that 
has fed and sustained society.  As such, the creation of a core cohort of youth who are able 
to become citizens who have an appreciation for farming while also being able to sustain 
their own lives in a holistic manner, is considered a major outcome of this drive.  In spite 
of their good intentions however, these programmes do not form an integral part of the 
institutional fabric of developing nations.      
40 |
Youth: Adding Value to Agriculture in the Caribbean
Embedded in the Government
Programmes such as the Youth Apprenticeship Programme in Agriculture (YAPA) and 
the Youth Enterprise Initiative in Trinidad and Grenada respectively, are examples of 
programmes embedded into the core of the central government. Ministries of agriculture 
and education take a vested interest in the development of young people and help to create 
programmes that assist in enhancing their agricultural knowledge and skills.  In the case of 
the YAPA programme for example,  youth are able to gain agricultural knowledge through 
hands-on activities, which are facilitated by local farmers who share their knowledge via 
on-farm demonstrations and other types of experiential activities.  These government-led 
programmes provide a realistic view of agriculture and give their participants a template 
from which to begin their agricultural careers, with the youth involved being given the 
opportunity to put their knowledge to practice through the management of their own plots 
and small enterprises, something that is considered a necessary and beneficial component 
of the skill building process.  Nevertheless, despite serving as a mechanism to provide youth 
with a chance to venture into commercial agriculture, the efficacy of the programme has been 
questioned as a result of the lack of government follow through in areas such as training, 
pre- and post-funding and land for farming.  The depth and breadth of the programmes 
have also been queried due to a lack of vision and questionable management practices.  
The Agricultural Professionals Development Programme (APDP) in Trinidad and Tobago 
was initiated by the Ministry of Food Production as a means of increasing the number of 
farmers in the country.  It was designed to boost the capacity of agriculture graduates to 
meet the challenges impacting the domestic agricultural sector, and is in line with the 
Ministry’s National Food Production Action Plan for the period 2012–2015. The APDP 
operates as a platform for engagement of graduates with a vision, ‘to assist Trinidad and 
Tobago to become a more food-secure nation through the creation of a globally competitive 
workforce of agricultural graduates through professional and technical skills enhancement 
within a motivational and structured environment’ (IICA 2012).  Graduates with a degree 
in Agriculture or Agribusiness have an opportunity to embark upon a one year customized 
internship in one of five areas namely Crop Production, Livestock Production, Aquaculture, 
Agribusiness or Agro-processing (IICA 2012).
The Helping out our Primary and Secondary Schools (HOOPSS) programme in St 
Lucia is described as playing an important role in the socioeconomic fabric of St Lucian 
households, especially in rural areas (IICA 2012), due to dwindling youth participation in 
agriculture. HOOPSS is built on a philosophy that only the actual engagement of young 
persons in theoretical and practical farming best-practice can provide that critical knowledge 
| 41
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
necessary for sustainable employment and ultimately, household food security (IICA 2012). 
The project also seeks to sensitize and expose students to the viability of agriculture as a 
business, and to promote the creation of agricultural leaders through school gardens and 
farm activities. Ultimately, it is hoped that this will drive the development of agriculture in 
St Lucia and as well, address food security and nutritional concerns of the school feeding 
programme.  Success is based on continuous collaboration amongst its many stakeholders, 
mainly, the Ministry of Agriculture (technical support), IICA (implementation support), 
and a number of formal linkages with actual markets such as the primary school feeding 
programmes, local restaurants, hotels, and most notably, Consolidated Foods Limited (CFL) 
a major supermarket on the island.
The Gilbert Agricultural and Rural Development Centre (GARDC) in Antigua started as 
a pilot project before being formalized with external funding (Maximay 2005). Its mission 
is to develop and maintain a demonstration centre to serve the Organisation of Eastern 
Caribbean States (OECS), by providing a place for practical, hands-on training in sustainable 
good agricultural practices that protect natural resources to assist the nation with food 
security and poverty alleviation. The centre, which has offered agricultural and enterprise 
training mainly to youth between the ages of 16 and 30 years since 1993, focuses on life and 
entrepreneurial skills development, with a specific emphasis on the use of natural resources 
in agriculture and other forms of rural enterprise.
COMPONENTS FOR SUCCESS BASED ON REVIEWED 
EXPERIENCES 
The above review suggested that agricultural development directed at youth in rural areas 
of the world has been supported by a variety of models ranging from government supported, 
top-down approaches, to a more grassroots-type orientation funded by local citizens, and 
others supported by regional agricultural organisations. Notwithstanding, the economic 
hardships, agricultural downsizing, and inadequate funding for youth programmes and 
agricultural services, for any intervention to have meaningful impact, it must incorporate 
basic youth development elements along with core agricultural components. The review 
of a number of youth agricultural programmes across the Caribbean, Latin America, and 
Africa, has brought to the fore essential issues that can promote youth involvement in the 
sector, and allow them to add value to the sector.
Taking all this into consideration, the essential components of a model will now be offered 
to help address some of the inherent issues countries face when trying to assist rural youth. 
Any, or all of these components, can be used by countries to construct their own template 
42 |
Youth: Adding Value to Agriculture in the Caribbean
for implementation that is in line with financial and other resources. It also allows for social, 
cultural and other types of contextual information to be appropriately inserted into the 
model.  Components, several of which have been referred to in previous regional reports, 
rather than a fixed model, provide the ability to be flexible while also providing a framework 
for success (King 2006; Maximay 2005; Gordon and Glean, 2004), as well as international 
country reports on development of youth in agriculture programmes.
Framework for the analysis
The framework presented in figure 2.1 serves to explain the central thesis of the discussion, 
that youth should be seen as key actors in the chain who can add value to agriculture. As 
presented by the FAO (2013), the framework is built around the core value chain in which 
value chain actors, i.e., those who take ownership of the product, and who produce or 
procure from the upstream level, add value to the product, and then sell it on to the next 
level.  Value chain actors are mostly private sector enterprises, but can include public sector 
organizations such as institutional buyers (e.g., food reserve agencies, emergency food 
buyers such as the World Food Programme [WFP]), and even youth.  
Figure 2.1: The Sustainable Value Chain Framework
 
Source: FAO (2013) 
| 43
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Value chain actors are sustained by business development support providers who do 
not take ownership of the product, but who play an essential role in facilitating the value 
creation process. Along with the value chain actors, these support providers represent 
the extended value chain. Three main types of support providers can be distinguished. 
Firstly, there are those who supply physical inputs, such as seeds at the production level 
or packaging materials at the processing level. Secondly, there are the service providers in 
areas such as field spraying, storage, transport, laboratory testing, management training 
and market research.  Thirdly, are the providers of financial services, which are separated 
from other services given the fundamental role played by working and investment capital 
in getting the value chain on a path of sustained growth.  The facilitation of access to inputs 
and services then becomes essential for youth if their roles as actors in a value chain are to 
be fully actualised.  A critical element of the core value chain is its governance structure. 
Governance refers to the nature of the linkages between actors at different links in the 
chain, and within the overall chain. As related to youth, some higher levels of governance 
and management of youth development in the sector would be another critical element for 
youth as agriculture promoters.
Value chain actors and support providers operate in a particular enabling environment 
in which social and natural environmental elements can be distinguished. Social elements 
refer to the man-made creations that make up a society, and which can be grouped into 
four types: socio-cultural elements (consumer preferences, religious requirements), 
organizational elements (national inter-professional associations, research and educational 
facilities), institutional elements (regulations, laws), and infrastructural elements (roads, 
ports, communication networks, energy grids). Thus communities, schools, neighbourhoods, 
regional and international organisations, concerned leaders of farmer groups, and civic 
minded citizens, all have roles to play in creating the enabling environment for increased 
youth participation in the food sector. The sustainability of the value chain plays out 
simultaneously along three dimensions – the economic level, the social level and at the level 
of the environment, all of which must be given adequate attention by all youth supporters.
Applicability to youth in the Caribbean: Value addition
As a constituency, youth add value to the chain of food production as key actors and 
their views must be factored into any decisions to be taken concerning their sustained 
involvement in the agriculture sector. A key statement by a youth leader in the region 
advised that ‘youth need to be properly prepared for the positions made available to them. 
There shouldn’t be a strong sense of entitlement that the government should provide any 
and all opportunities’ (CARICOM 2012). Nevertheless, there are issues that constrain youth 
44 |
Youth: Adding Value to Agriculture in the Caribbean
participation in the food production sector, which were extensively discussed at the regional 
level meeting of Caribbean youth leaders in Antigua, in 2012. Some key issues raised are 
listed below (CARICOM 2012);
Strengths of youth in the region:
• Technical competence achieved through training programmes
• Youthful exuberance
• Persistence
• Strong ICT skills
Constraints:
• Access to initial support for start-up of businesses
• Lack of capital, land, technical support and farm equipment
• Lack of mentorship
• Inadequate resources to sustain youth development and leadership
• Urban bias
• Youth not prepared for leadership
• Older generation not giving youth the opportunity to lead
Opportunities:
Many opportunities and action areas were suggested by participants at the forum which 
they genuinely believed would assist them to make a successful entry into, and have a 
sustainable livelihood in the sector. These included:
• Focusing on specialty production modes such as nutraceuticals, culinary herb trays, 
branded produce (e.g. Fairtrade)
• Exploring linkages with tourism 
• Informing youth of the opportunities that exist in the agribusiness sector
• Initiating an internship programme to allow students to hone their skills
• Exposing youth to all forms of protected agriculture and other climate-smart 
production systems
| 45
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
• Providing services in marketing, landscaping etc.
• Rebranding ‘farming’ to ‘food production’ in an effort to delink with the negative 
connotations of traditional farming
• Teaching agriculture at all the primary and secondary schools
• Developing a mechanism for information sharing among youth and more 
experienced farmers in the technical aspects of food production to enable them to 
become entrepreneurs, as against being labourers
• Encouraging greater use of modern technology and the social media
• Teaching agriculture in an interactive manner rather than classroom/textbook 
mainly
• Considering opportunities in culinary tourism
• Exploring post-harvest areas such as packaging and marketing of products
• Considering nutrition security as an issue to be of equal or greater importance than 
food security
• Revitalising the 4H movement as an organisation which can help promote 
agriculture among youth
• Highlighting the successes in agriculture so that young persons may be encouraged 
to consider getting involved in the sector
• Developing a regional initiative to promote youth in agriculture
• Hiring national consultants to work with policy makers
• Undertaking advocacy work
• Having persons at senior levels in the sector serve as mentors for young persons, 
especially agriculture graduates
• Looking beyond primary production and considering the value added operations 
and manufacturing aspects of an agribusiness enterprise
• Instituting job attachments as an initiative that could build youth capacity
• Identification of training and scholarship opportunities for self-development
• Youth engagement in volunteerism to prepare themselves for the future, and as a 
practical way of gaining work experience
46 |
Youth: Adding Value to Agriculture in the Caribbean
Recommendations
The two major recommendations coming out of the exercise included:
• Inviting policymakers to future youth  fora so that they can be more enlightened 
on the issues; and 
• Advocating and lobbying for greater collaboration between the Ministries of 
Agriculture and Education since both have a tremendous impact on the decision 
made by youth to enter the agriculture sector.
MODEL FOR YOUTH DEVELOPMENT IN AGRICULTURE
Taking all of the above into consideration, Figure 2.2 is a diagrammatic representation of 
several issues that we believe impact youth development on the food production sector. Each 
of these issues is now discussed under three broad headings: Youth centred interventions; 
Human capital interventions; and, Governmental interventions (enabling policies).
Figure 2.2: Components of the Proposed Youth Making a Difference Model 
Educa&on	
  and	
  
training 
Cultural	
  values	
  
and	
  mores Teach	
  self-­‐
reliance 
Development	
  
of	
   Encourage	
  
community	
   Innova&on/
partnership Business	
  Sills 
Youth 
Target	
   Development Land	
  for	
  
cons&tutents	
   farming 
in  Food Sector 
Development	
  
Experien&al	
   of	
  
learning partnerships 
Facilitate	
   Credit/Fund	
   Mentorship
access	
  to	
  land Program 
	
  
| 47
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Youth centred intervention
Identify the constituents: the focus should be primarily on graduates, whether from the 
universities in the region or technical colleges. New agriculture requires persons prepared 
to innovate, use modern technology and who are business oriented, something for example, 
that is in line with the Sudanese model project titled ‘Graduate Employment Fund Program 
for 2005–2008’1. Agriculture must be seen as a worthy profession and not as something 
only pursued by those who fail in the formal education system. While there will always 
have to be training for young persons who are not academically inclined, a development 
model must of necessity focus on those constituents who are most likely to succeed in the 
achievement of national food security goals.  
Human capital interventions
Promote education and training: opportunities for youth to be trained to understand 
the sector and work efficiently in the sector are important.  These educational experiences 
must prepare youth to tackle the changing tides of agriculture.  Cutting edge resources, 
technology, and other innovative tools must be introduced in order to truly prepare youth 
for the agricultural industry.
Emphasise experiential learning: while classroom work is important, more emphasis 
is required on practices.  Although the YAPA model in Trinidad and Tobago was assessed 
and found to have a good mix of classroom and experiential learning activities, the latter 
were called into question particularly as there was inadequate preparation for the ‘new 
agriculture’, with still too much emphasis placed on traditional methods of field-based 
farming in the sun for long hours using minimum technology (Ganpat and Webster 2007). 
This is certainly not going to attract young persons into agriculture, so it is important that an 
engaging and interactive curriculum, together with use of latest technology and techniques, 
be developed to fully engage youth in the field.
Encourage mentorship:  the use of business and technical mentors will always be a critical 
aspect of the proposed transformation of youth involvement in the food sector, especially 
in the Caribbean, where there are few role models in the form of successful farmers who 
are prepared to state publicly that the sector is a lucrative one. What one however generally 
finds is an environment in which the elders convey extremely negative messages to youth 
about the sector so that it becomes more difficult to encourage youths, especially where they 
have access to other options, to take an interest and be involved in agricultural production. 
1.  http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTAFRMDTF/Resources/Document_5.doc
48 |
Youth: Adding Value to Agriculture in the Caribbean
Mentors with positive dispositions can therefore help direct youth to successful engagement 
in the sector.
Promote the sector: the food sector has never been proactively sought out by the brightest 
and the best to lead the transformation, and is not promoted as one of first choice, despite 
its importance, profitability and current high profile as a mitigation avenue against climate 
change. National, and even regional communication/promotional programmes or campaigns 
on a sustained basis can bring the message to an otherwise distracted youth population.
Highlight linkages:  the importance of agriculture can be reinforced by demonstrating 
its linkages to other sectors such as health (from a nutritional standpoint), tourism, 
infrastructure (e.g. soft engineering solutions for slope protection) and sport (field/pitch/
course management).  Youth can also assist in bringing to the fore other areas which can 
be directly or indirectly linked to agriculture. 
Teach values: this includes respecting and valuing the environment (flora and fauna, 
water, and the earth).  It is insufficient to teach future farmers skills without providing a 
sense of value for the environment and encouraging sustainability.
Teach self-reliance:  an emphasis must be placed on broadening the scope of agriculture 
for it to be viewed as a sustainable and acceptable career. Caribbean youth need to be 
encouraged and empowered to become problem solvers.  The time has passed for the 
promotion of the traditional approach, which upholds the government as some sort of 
generous benefactor that provides all that is needed.  Actions that build self-confidence and 
self-reliance will not only contribute to transforming Caribbean agriculture, but societies 
in general.
Encourage innovation: young persons must be taught to experiment and innovate. New 
agriculture will require constant innovation for farmers to maintain a competitive edge over 
foreign products. This skill has to be learnt and should form part of the learning experiences. 
Youth should be encouraged to be innovative and both adopt and adapt strategies that 
can be used to explore new and emerging opportunities in intellectual property, including 
branding and utility models, agriculture, and in science and technology.
Teach business skills: traditional training is generally insufficient as it is geared towards 
improving production skills in situations where there is generally poor farm record keeping 
across the region. This is insufficient. Post-production and marketing skills are equally 
important for young people to successfully engage the market economy, and source external 
markets. Computers and other communication devices must be seen as primary tools for 
young people in this regard.
| 49
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Teach sustainability: the resources in the region are quite limited and must be used in a 
productive manner in the present, while maintaining productivity for future farmers. This 
will require a reorientation of training at all levels, starting at the university level, where 
issues of sustainability do not take precedence in most curricula.
Governmental interventions (enabling policies)
Provide land for farming: farmers in the region cannot practise extensive forms of 
agriculture due to limited land areas.  Modern agriculture, which is land intensive, requires 
smaller parcels of land and is regarded as the preferred option today.  There are several 
forms of agriculture that do not require very fertile lands, e.g., protected agriculture using 
soil-less media, vermiculture, and biotechnology. Agro-based industries also do not require 
large land spaces to be successful.
Create a credit/Fund programme: this can be set up to assist graduates who wish to 
engage in small- and medium-sized projects. This is in line with the aforementioned Sudan 
model, and the ‘Youth Window’, a former project of the Agricultural Development Bank 
(ADB) in Trinidad and Tobago, which had some success. There is also a need for venture 
capital and humane financing provisions to encourage youth to engage credit arrangements.
Development of partnerships: linkages with organizations and institutions should be 
actively promoted, and because the sector is diverse, assistance may have to come from a 
range of sources. Young farmers must be placed in direct contact with these agencies to 
access information and other support in a timely manner. Linkages with other sectors are 
also crucial. The tourism and food and beverage sectors can promote wider markets for 
products.
Continuous monitoring and evaluation:  any model geared at effective change would need 
to be constantly monitored, evaluated and modified where necessary. In a dynamic sector 
like agriculture, to allow mechanisms to run on for years without evaluation is tantamount 
to abandoning a seedling or new born livestock.
CONCLUSION
To outsiders, the Caribbean may appear as one people, and indeed, it is in some respects. 
However, a closer look will reveal tremendous diversity, and while this is cherished among 
Caribbean people, it makes development planning somewhat difficult. In the foregoing 
analysis, this diversity in social and cultural areas, economic resources, human resource 
capacities, land availability and topographies is acknowledged.  It is for this reason therefore 
50 |
Youth: Adding Value to Agriculture in the Caribbean
that neither the pattern of other development initiatives is followed, nor is a fixed model 
offered for promoting youth involvement in the agriculture sector. Instead, based on a review 
of international experiences with youth in agriculture programmes, a range of components 
is proposed that could be included in any intervention. A particular country or grouping of 
countries may choose to incorporate componenets into a culturally and socially acceptable 
model that is in line with resources and development goals. Because the construction of a 
definitive model will take a multitude of Caribbean experiences gathered overtime, for now, 
only the essential components have been identified as we edge towards a model.
REFERENCES
Bennell, P. 2007. Promoting Livelihood Opportunities for Rural Youth.  Rome: International 
Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
Bickford, D.M., and N. Reynolds. 2002. Activism and Service-learning: Reframing 
Volunteerism as Acts of Dissent. Pedagogy: Critical approaches to Teaching, Literature, 
Language, Composition and Culture. Journal of Community Service Learning 2, vol. 
2: 229–54.
CARICOM. 2012. Report of the Regional Forum on Youth and Rural Modernization. 
Caribbean Community (CARICOM). http://caricom.org/jsp/CWA/Documents/
Final%20Report%20-%20Regional%20Policy%20Forum%20for%20Youth%20
and%20Rural%20Modernization.pdf. Accessed June 12, 2014.
Daigre, E. 2000. Toward a Critical Service-learning Pedagogy: A Freirean Approach to 
Civic Literacy. Academic Exchange (Winter): 6–14.
Deshingkar, P. 2004. Understanding the Implications of Migration for Pro-poor 
Agricultural Growth.  London: Overseas Development Institute.
ECLAC.  2008. CEPAL Statistics: Databases and Statistical Publications. Santiago: United 
Nations.  
FAO. 2002. Sharing Junior Famer Field and Life School Experiences: Challenges and 
Innovations.  Rome:  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.   
———. 2005. Skills Development for Rural People: A Renewed Challenge.  Rome: Food and 
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.  
———. 2013. Developing Sustainable and Inclusive Food Value Chains for Climate Smart 
Agriculture.  Climate-smart Agriculture Sourcebook 11. Rome: FAO.  
Freire, P. 1998. Pedagogy of Freedom - Ethics, Democracy, and Civic Courage. Baltimore, 
MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Ganpat, W., and N. Webster. 2007. An Approach to Strengthening the Agricultural Industry 
| 51
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
through a Youth Participatory Programme in the Caribbean: The Trinidadian YAPA 
Model.  Report prepared for the Extension Division Ministry of Agriculture, Land and 
Marine Resources (MALMR). Trinidad and Tobago: MALMR.
Godfrey, M. 2005. Youth Employment Policy in Developing and Transition Countries- 
Prevention as A Well as a Cure. Mimeo.
Gordon, U.M., and A. Glean. 2004. Enhancing Agricultural Policy Development and 
Implementation through the Participation of Women and Youth. In Proceedings of a 
Caribbean Workshop. Georgetown, Guyana: IICA.
Hart, S. 2006. Breaking Literacy Boundaries through Critical Service-Learning: Education 
for the Silenced and Marginalized. Mentoring and Tutoring 14, no.1:17–32.
IICA. 2012. Choices Caribbean AgriCulture Our Way. Inter-American Institute for Co-
operation on Agriculture (IICA). http://www.iica.int/Esp/Programas/agronegocios/
Publicaciones%20de%20Comercio%20Agronegocios%20e%20Inocuidad/B2997i.pdf. 
Retrieved June 11, 2014. 
ILO. 2005. Global Employment Trends for Youth. Geneva: ILO.
King, I.M. 2006. Strengthening, Developing and Increasing Youth Participation in 
Agriculture in the Caribbean Region: Issues, Analysis, Strategy and Action Plan. St 
Lucia: IICA.  
Maximay, S. 2005. Sustaining Youth Participation in Agriculture. Report prepared for 
the Inter-American Institute for Co-operation on Agriculture (IICA), CaRC/LC-305.
Webster, N., and W. Ganpat. 2006.  Exploring Adult Youth Development Workers in the 
Process of Civic Youth Engagement in Trinidad and Tobago. Journal of International 
Agricultural and Extension Education 13, no. 2:15–26.
World Bank. 2006. World Development Report 2007: Development and the Next 
Generation. Washington DC:  World Bank.
Young, H., S. Jaspers, R. Brown and H. Khogali. 2001. Food Security Assessments in 
Emergencies: A Livelihoods Approach. Humanitarian Practice Network Paper 36. 
London: Overseas Development Institute.  http://www.odihpn.org/report.asp?ID=2301. 
Accessed May 15, 2014.
52 |
Small Animal Production 
Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
Cicero H. O. Lallo, Adrian Paul and Sebrena Smalling
INTRODUCTION
The Caribbean, like many other regions in the tropical ecological zone, has 
serious food and protein security issues given the escalation in grain prices. 
This is primarily because 80 percent of the region’s meat supply comes 
from poultry. To address this issue, rabbit production was identified by 
governments within the Caribbean Region as a viable alternative to enhance 
protein security and food sovereignty.  The production of rabbits and ducks 
in the Caribbean is generally based on small-scale, backyard and low input 
systems.  The fast growth rate of rabbits (compared to chicken), their short 
generation interval and ability to convert forages into high quality protein 
(Leng 2008) are attributes that make them ideal for a role in enhancing 
protein security in the Caribban Region. Over the last decade, while levels 
of rabbit production have increased in Trinidad and Tobago, demand still 
outstrips supply.  This has resulted in a move from small backyard production 
to medium-sized intensive commercial and semi-commercial production 
systems.
In tandem with this, there has also been an increase in duck production 
regionally and globally, with a similar trend observed towards intensive 
and semi-intensive type production systems. For centuries, ducks have 
provided an important source of animal protein for the people of Asia, where 
domestic duck farming originated. For these populations, duck meat and 
eggs have, and continue to be, important sources of high quality dietary 
protein, energy, vitamins and minerals. In 1996, over 2.5 million metric 
tons (MT) of duck meat were produced globally, an increase of 11 percent 
over the previous year.  This was the highest increase in the poultry sector 
for the corresponding period, with chicken increasing only by 4.3 percent 
C H A P T E R  THREE
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
and turkey by 3.2 percent.  Similarly in Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana and Suriname, such 
trends can also be observed.  Many farmers are either increasing their stock or new farmers 
are establishing duck enterprises. Several factors have helped to sustain this trend, including 
the duck’s ability to adapt to a range of environments and the fact that ducks are considered 
to be hardy animals and show greater resistance to many common diseases and parasites 
than other domestic poultry.  Ducks therefore require a less rigid vaccination programme 
than broiler chickens. They are however, very susceptible to mycotoxins, and as a result, 
management of this factor is very important in their production.  Another factor also driving 
increased duck production is the mushrooming of Chinese restaurants, particularly in 
Trinidad and Tobago, Suriname and Guyana.
Before starting a farm, or when evaluating an existing enterprise, farmers should make 
every effort to gather as much information on all relevant aspects of production and 
marketing. The information acquired should be used to guide both the establishment and 
day-to-day management of the farm. The following are some key areas that should be taken 
into consideration when beginning an enterprise, and which can serve as a guide for success:
•	 What to sell: Identify and define exactly the products that are to be produced - 
breeding stock, fryers, fertile eggs, day-old ducklings, rabbits and ducks for the live 
or processed market.  
•	 What the market requires: Find out exactly what are the market requirements and 
standards in terms of breeds, market weight, and carcass quality.
•	 How much the market requires: This influences the scale of the operation necessary 
to produce a set level of output.
•	 When the product is required: Determine trends in market demand and market 
prices. Is it a seasonal or year-round market?
•	 Who are the consumers: Identify the target market(s). 
•	 The best way to get the product to consumers: What is the best method of marketing 
or selling the product?
•	 Breeds and adaptability: Consider the breeds available, their uses and performance 
under the prevailing environmental conditions in which they will be reared. 
•	 Performance standards of the breeds: The ability of available breeds to produce 
the desired output in the environment in which they will be producing.
•	 How best to house and manage the stock: Identify the most appropriate production 
system and technology that should be used, considering the level of available 
resources and the planned output of the farm.
54 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
•	 Source and availability of duck and rabbit feed: The availability of a continuous 
source of high quality life cycle feeds.
•	 How to keep the stock healthy: Seek guidance on the best health maintenance 
programme. 
•	 Plans for expansion: Current demand and market trends are good indicators of 
future demand, and ultimately influence the scale of the operation and plans for 
expansion.
RABBIT PRODUCTION
Breeds of rabbits utilised in CARICOM
• Rabbits are reared mainly for their meat in the Caribbean, with a number of breeds 
and their crosses being found in the region. The most popular ones include:
• Flemish Giant: weighing more than 5.5 kg at maturity
• Californian: a medium-sized breed, which can reach 4.0 kg at maturity 
• New Zealand White: animals can attain a weight of more than 4.5 kg at maturity
• Chinchilla: there are different strains of this breed, e.g. the giant strain, which can 
generally weigh more than 6.5 kg at maturity
• Crossbreeds: including New Zealand White x Californian, Flemish Giant x New 
Zealand White, Flemish Giant x Californian, Chinchilla x New Zealand White, 
Californian x Chinchilla x New Zealand White
The most popular cross however is the New Zealand White and Californian, largely 
because these breeds and their crossbreds have shown good adaptability to the tropics, as it 
relates to their ‘thermo-tolerance’ and performance.  The Flemish Giant and Chinchilla are 
used mainly as terminal sires.  The crosses of these breeds show excellent meat: bone ratio.
 
Terminal sires: Sires used in a crossbreeding system in which all their progeny 
are marketed.
| 55
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Nutrition and feeding
The rabbit is a monogastric herbivore and a hind gut-fermenter, with the caecum making 
up 40 percent of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT).  Thus, the digestive system and the feeding 
strategy (caecotrophy, the practice of ingesting soft faeces of caecal origin) give the rabbit 
an advantage over poultry and pigs for use in sustainable farming systems.  The caecum 
with its microbial activity, caecotrophy and high feed intake (between five and 8 g/100g 
body weight [BW]) is important for digestion, nutrient utilisation and meeting the nutrient 
requirements of the rabbit. Recycling of nutrients via the consumption of soft faeces 
(caecotropes) produced from the materials that pass through the caecal cycle, compensate 
for low or poor quality protein in the diet.1  The nutrients rabbit require in their feed are 
grouped into the following categories: protein, carbohydrates, fat, minerals, and vitamins:
• Protein – is important for muscle building, and is a major component of the cell 
membrane, hormones and enzymes.  The nutritive value of proteins is dependent 
on its amino acid composition, the amount of protein consumed by the animal, the 
portion that is digested in the gut and the portion absorbed as free amino acids or 
peptides. Because rabbits are non-ruminants they require essential amino acids. 
In all the amino acids, lysine and methionine are found to be the most deficient 
because the ingredients used in feed formulations tend to be low in these amino 
acids.  Other amino acids include: isoleucine, tryptophan, leucine, phenylalnine, 
threonine and valine.
 Plant proteins used in feeding rabbits fall into two major categories: seed and leaf 
proteins.  Generally, protein meal from legumes and oilseeds are higher in albumin 
and globulins (soluble protein) thus, the proteins of legumes are normally higher 
in essential amino acids than cereal grains (high in storage/insoluble protein) 
(Villamide, Nicodemus, Fraga and Carabaño 2010).  Nevertheless, a major constraint 
associated with their use in the unprocessed form relates to the presence of anti-
nutritional factors (e.g. tannins, trypsin inhibitors, and lectin – a carbohydrate-
binding protein), which limits their use. The major protein source used in rabbit 
concentrate feed is soybean meal.  
• Carbohydrates – in rabbit feed these comprise sugars and starches, located largely 
within the plant cell (which are hydrolysed by the endogenous intestinal enzymes 
of the animal), and cellulose found principally in the cell wall (which is hydrolysed 
by microbial enzymes, and provides fibre). Compared to starch, sugars (e.g. glucose 
1. For further reading go http://www. mekhan.org/prorab/leng.htm
56 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
and fructose) are readily digested by the animal and absorbed in the small intestine 
to provide a source of energy (Blas and Gidenne 2010).  Starch on the other hand, 
is nearly completely digested in the GIT of the rabbit but the amount is dependent 
on the source of the starch and the age of the rabbit.  Because rabbits are hindgut 
fermenters, they are able to digest cellulose and utilise it as an energy source.  The 
fermentative process by caecal microbes produce volatile fatty acids (VFAs) such as 
acetate, butyrate and propionate, which are absorbed in the hindgut and provide a 
source of energy for rabbits (Gidenne, Carabaño, Garcia de Blas 2010).  Digestive 
disorders in weaned rabbit may be due to stress brought about by management 
changes and stress due to physiological changes in the animal.  It was normally 
accepted that digestive disorders in weaned rabbits were due largely to an overload 
of rapidly fermentable carbohydrate; however the thinking is that the incidence 
of digestive disorder may be more related to dietary fibre level and a reduction in 
the starch to fibre ratio in the diet (Gidenne et al. 2010), which can be corrected 
by increasing the fibre requirements, and lowering the starch content of the diet.
• Fat – functions as a primary source of energy, to increase the palatability of the 
feed and as lubrication in the pelleting process. It also enables the absorption of 
fat-soluble vitamins in the gut.  Adult rabbits appear to have little capacity to digest 
fat in the small intestine because lipase activity is restricted to the caecum.  A high 
amount of fat in the diet may limit cellulose fermentation in the caecum, resulting 
in its excretion as a component of the hard faeces.  
• Minerals and vitamins – these can be satisfied by the use of calcium and phosphorus 
supplements and a trace mineral salt and vitamin premix in the commercial 
concentrate, or from the forage portion of the diet.
Feeding rabbits
In the Caribbean, rabbits are primarily fed on a forage-based diet supplemented with 
commercial rabbit feed in a 2:1 ratio to enable a feed conversion ratio (FCR) of 3.0-3.5 g 
DMI/g BW in grower rabbits.  Small-scale backyard farmers generally use higher levels 
of forages for feeding, as against medium-sized intensive commercial systems, and a 
commercial rabbit concentrate is fed ad libitum, along with some wilted forage.  Rabbits 
given concentrate (high energy density) will consume 5 g/100g BW.  When fed forages 
alone, they need to consume over 8 g/100g BW.  Growing rabbits fed concentrate + wilted 
forage consume 6.0 to 6.6 g/100g BW on a dry matter (DM) basis and average daily gain 
(ADG) is between 30–32 g/d in Trinidad (Table 3.1).  The following are suggested rates for 
feeding commercial rabbit concentrate and with forages fed ad libitum:
| 57
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
• Buck - 80 g/d
• Pregnant/gestating doe - 120 g/d
• Non- pregnant doe - 96 g/d
• Growing stage - 60 g+10 g/week until 100g/d
• Lactating does - 100g/d + 10 g/kit being nursed
Local forages used to feed rabbits include grasses (e.g. elephant grass - Pennisetum 
purpureum, para grass - Brachiaria mutica and tanner grass - Brachiara arrecta), legumes 
(e.g. leucaena - Leucaena leucocephala, tropical kudzu - Pueraria phaseoloides and gliricidia 
- Gliricidia sepium) and protein tree forages (e.g. Trichanthera - Trichanthera gigantean 
and rabbit meat - Alteranathera tenella), in which protein is concentrated in the leaves. 
Forages are normally supplemented with a commercial rabbit concentrate feed in intensive 
commercial production systems in the Caribbean. There are also some producers who feed 
a concentrate that has been specially formulated by the feed millers to meet all the nutrient 
requirements of the rabbit, including the fibre requirements. Agro by-products such as spent 
brewers grains, vegetable scraps, cassava leaves and meal, and sweet potato slips are also 
used for feeding rabbits. 
The greatest challenge to developing sustainable production systems for the Caribbean 
lies in feeding, as feed costs make up more than 60 percent of total production costs. The 
escalation in grain prices means that the use of concentrate will have to be minimised, and 
a greater amount of forages and by-products must be fed.  Research has been initiated in 
the Department of Food Production, Faculty of Food and Agriculture, the University of the 
West Indies (UWI), St Augustine, Trinidad, in this regard.  One study, which examined the 
use of a combination of forages with reduced concentrate levels for growing rabbits, showed 
promising results as Table 3.2 and Figure 3.1 illustrate.  
  
58 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
Table 3.1: Performance of rabbits (mean values) fed three different forages 
with a commercial rabbit concentrate
TREATMENTS
  T1 T2 T3
Parameters Tropical Rabbit Tanner ±SEM P-LevelsKudzu Meat Grass
Initial LW (g) 784.70 730.70 917.70 61.90 =0.102
Final LW (g) 2367 2228     2424     7.3 =0.199
Avg. daily gain (g) 31.64 29.94 30.12 1.0. =0.419
Forage DM intake g/hd/d 32.28 33.58 36.74 0.79 =0.001
g/100g LW 2.09 2.33 2.28 0.12 =0.319
Concentrate DM intake g/
61.55 61.75 64.91 1.15 =0.018
hd/d
g/100g LW 3.96 4.31 3.99 0.19 =0.365
Total DM intake g/hd/d 93.93 95.33 101.65 1.03 =0.00
g/100g LW 6.04 6.63 6.27 0.29 =0.363
FCR
2.98 3.26 3.42 0.11 =0.031
Nutrient Intake: g/hd/d
Crude protein 19.33 15.73 15.18 0.22 <0.01
Crude fibre 27.14 25.12 23.07 1.23 <0.01
Crude fat 2.03 2.47 2.24 0.02 <0.01
Ash 8.63 7.91 13.82 0.12 <0.01
LW – liveweight; DM – dry matter; g/hd/d – grams/head/day; FCR – feed conversion ratio
Source: Paul and Lallo (2014)   
| 59
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Table 3.2: Carcass yield of growing crossbred (Californian x Chinchilla x 
New Zealand White) rabbits fed different forages with reduced concentrate 
levels
                                                  Treatments
                                                   
Parameters T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 ±SEM P-value
Slaughter BW, g 2643 2508 2602 2493 2353 2625 90.15 =0.270
Hot carcass weight 
1407 1235 1348 1252 1223 1375 55.94 =0.149
(HCW), g
Carcass yield g/100g 
53.15a 49.24bd 51.83ac 50.16bc 51.98ac 52.37ac 0.75 =0.027
BW
Carcass Composition 
(g/100g HCW) 15.15 17.01 16.44 15.08 16.06 15.08 0.60 =0.174
Shoulders Weight
Ribs weight 24.55 20.50 22.40 20.37 19.71 23.26 1.20 =0.088
Saddle weight 24.86 25.80 24.93 26.67 26.75 25.03 1.41 =0.853
Hind legs 37.63 38.47 37.72 37.58 37.62 36.74 0.79 =0.779
Head weight 16.04 16.86 16.45 15.41 18.84 15.80 1.07 =0.321
Liver weight 4.56 5.40 6.40 4.98 4.77 5.30 0.63 =0.425
Kidney weight 1.07 1.48 1.11 1.22 1.23 1.21 0.13 =0.382
Separable fat 2.26 2.70 1.23 2.86 3.13 2.19 0.61 =0.364
T1- Ad libitum concentrate feed, T2- 50 g concentrate feed + ad libitum Tanner grass, T3- 50 g concentrate feed 
+ ad libitum Trichanthera,T4- 50 g concentrate feed + ad libitum Sweet Potato Vines, T5- 50 g concentrate feed + ad 
libitum Gliricidia, T6- 50 g concentrate feed + ad libitum, and a mix of  Tanner grass + Trichanthera + Sweet Potato 
Vines + Gliricidia 
Source: Ram and Lallo (2014)
Box 3.1 outlines the best practices that should be employed for feeding rabbits in hot, 
humid climates.
60 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
Box 3.1: Best Practices For Feeding Rabbits In Hot, Humid Climates
When feeding rabbits you should:
• Preferably feed them in the evening, at the same time each day
• Provide a good fibre source to prevent enteritis
• Not feed large amounts of highly soluble carbohydrate
• Wilt green forages overnight when these are to be fed
• Ensure a supply of fresh potable water is available at all times (1 nipple /2-3 
animals is sufficient) 
Reproductive management
Productivity in the breeding unit is defined as the number of young per doe per unit of time 
(normally measured over a year).  Productivity depends on: the interval between successive 
kindlings, litter size at birth, and the survival of the young (mortality rate).  Rabbits, like 
all other animals will respond to gentle treatment, thereby allowing the breeder to easily 
handle and manage them.  An animal’s temperament is therefore something that should 
be taken into consideration when selecting rabbits for breeding.  For example, if one has 
an aggressive doe, culling may be advisable since she may produce aggressive off-spring. 
Formerly, the recommendation of one buck for every ten does was used, however at present 
this has been adjusted to one buck for 25 to 30 does.  Nonetheless, under different climatic 
conditions and management systems, the breeder will have to make a judgment call to 
determine the buck: doe ratio best suited for his/her system.
Age at first mating
Reducing the unproductive period before the first litter can increase rabbit productivity; 
however, both body development and age must be taken into consideration in order to 
determine the proper time to breed animals.  For example, smaller breeds mature much 
earlier than the heavier breeds, and does may become receptive to males at 3.5 months of 
age and so capable of conception at 4–4.5 months.  However, the time animals are bred is 
not only dependent on age but also based on physical observation of body condition. At the 
University of the West Indies field station (UFS) in Trinidad, mating is done at 6.5 months, 
which is usually the time when the animal is sexually mature, and has the body condition 
to sustain the reproductive function.  Medium-sized breeds like New Zealand White and 
| 61
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Californian can be first bred at five to six months of age, while this is done at six to seven 
months of age with a larger breed such as the Flemish Giant. It should be noted too, that 
nutrition has a strong influence on the age at first mating, and does should not be served 
until they reach 80–85 percent of the mature body weight recommended for the breed, 
even if they may have attained the appropriate age. 
Mating process
In most domestic mammals, ovulation takes place at regular intervals when female is in 
oestrus (heat).  The female rabbit does not have an oestrous cycle with a regular period of 
heat, and so does are considered to be in oestrus ‘permanently’, with ovulation occurring 
only after mating. The rabbit is therefore referred to as a reflex ovulator. Ova released 
without fertilisation may accompany a pseudo-pregnancy which may last 15–17 days.  Signs 
of heat in rabbits include: chinning, attempts to join other rabbits in nearby cage, and the 
vulva appearing pink and moist. Does are always taken to the male for mating where she 
will readily accept the buck (Figure 3.2).  The doe may fight with the buck if he is placed in 
her pen and may cause injury to the buck.  Sometimes, a doe may need to be restrained in 
order for mating to occur.  In other cases, she may refuse one male, but when placed with 
another male, will readily accept him and mate.  
Parturition
The gestation period in the rabbit generally averages 31–32 days and is influenced by the 
size of the litter being carried.  Prior to parturition, the does will show maternal behaviour 
such as nest building, so that part of the management process must be the provision of a 
nest box measuring 40 cm x 30 cm x 30 cm.  During this period the doe will pull hair from 
around the nipple area on the belly and dewlap, which will be used to build the nest in the 
box provided (Figure 3.3).  The nest building behaviour observed appears to be linked to 
an increase in the oestrogen: progesterone ratio, as well as the secretion of prolactin.  Note 
however, that the doe does not always make a nest and may sometimes kindle (give birth) 
outside the nest box.  As with other animals, the secretion of corticosteroids by the adrenal 
glands of the young appear to play a role in signalling the onset of parturition, which usually 
occurs early in the morning, and lasts approximately 30 minutes, with kits being born at 
intervals of one to five minutes. 
Box 3.2 provides a summary of the best practices that can be used for breeding rabbits.
62 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
Box 3.2: Best Practices for Breeding Rabbits
 In breeding rabbits it is important to remember that:
• The female should always be taken to the male for mating
• After copulation the female should be immediately removed from the male 
and returned to her pen for maternal preparation
• The doe should not be mated if she is not at the required weight, even if 
she has attained the age of puberty
• Females that have a high service to conception ratio should be culled
• Females with more than eight parturitions should be culled
• A nest box should be provided at least two days before parturition
Handling rabbits
Rabbits should never be lifted by their ears or legs, as this can lead to permanent damage. 
Small rabbits or fryers should be lifted and carried by gently grasping the animal firmly with 
the heel of the hands in the areas on its back close to the tail to avoid damaging the pelt or 
carcass (Figure 3.4).  Heavier rabbits should be carried by grasping a fold of skin over the 
shoulder with one hand, and placing the other hand under the rump to support the weight 
of the animal (Figure 3.5).
Environment and housing
El Kholy (2011) indicated that the thermoneutral zone (TNZ) for rabbits ranged from 
21°C–25°C.  Alnaimy, Fayez, Habeeb and Marai (1994) however cited a temperature of 
21°C.  For temperatures outside this zone, the rabbit will experience heat stress and has 
to expend energy to maintain its core temperature.  Thus, when the ambient temperature 
is above 25–30°C, the animal changes its posture and stretches itself out in order to lose 
heat by radiation and convection.  During this period the ear (which acts like a radiator) 
temperature increases, and the efficiency of cooling will be influenced by the air speed 
around the animal (Habeeb, Marai, El-Maghawry and Gad 1997). French researchers have 
recommended a relative humidity of 60–65 percent as optimum for rabbits. Within the 
tropics temperature and humidity are two key elements that influence thermoregulation, 
with temperature being the most dominant factor. Because these two factors influence the 
heat stress experienced by rabbits in a tropical environment, they have consequences for 
housing design.  
| 63
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Environmental stress has a negative impact on the production and performance of rabbits, 
which tend to achieve homeostasis by regulating their internal body temperature through 
changes in skin temperature, ear temperature, and respiratory rate under unfavourable 
environmental conditions.  As temperature increased from 20°C to 33°C, Lebas, Coudert, 
De Rochambeau and Thébault (1986) reported an increase in rectal temperature by 3.6 
percent for New Zealand White and 3.1 percent for Californian White.  Skin temperature 
increased by 0.27°C, and respiratory rate increased by seven percent for every 1°C change 
in ambient temperature. A 50 percent increase in water consumption was reported as 
temperature rose from 20°C to 30°C (Marai and Ali 2004).
Thermoneutral zone: The range of environmental temperatures over which the heat 
produced by a warm-blooded animal remains fairly constant.
Homeostasis:  The ability or tendency of an organism or cell to maintain internal 
equilibrium by adjusting its physiological processes.
Housing systems recommended for commercial rabbit production in the Caribbean are 
hutches made entirely of wire mesh, situated in covered areas, either suspended from the 
roof or placed on stands which are further enclosed in an open-sided-house (Figure 3.6). 
Utilising the open-sided house design facilitates a favourable environment.  The design and 
dimensions of housing systems are important since these can have a direct impact on the 
housing micro-climate (i.e. environment), the animals’ metabolic rate, health, welfare and 
production (depending on the stocking density).
Rastogi (1991) recommended a hutch size of 0.76 m x 0.76 m x 0.46 m for rabbit production 
in Trinidad.  The NRC (1996) has recommended a space allowance of 1,350cm2   for rabbits 
less than 2 kg, and 1,200cm2 for growing rabbits less than 10 weeks old, to allow for the 
appropriate cage space required to facilitate the increased activity and rapid locomotion of 
the growing rabbit (Figure 3.7).
Stocking density
Stocking densities above the optimum have been found to negatively affect animal health, 
performance and carcass quality (Yakubu, Adua and Adamude, 2008; Szendro and Zotte 
2011), but improve the economics of rabbit production (Verspecht et al. 2011; Yakubi and 
Adua 2010).  Studies done on stocking densities for rabbits housed in cages located in 
naturally ventilated open-sided house at the University of the West Indies Field Station 
(UFS) rabbitry indicated that 11 to 13 rabbits/m2 was optimum for animal performance 
and profitability.  The study also indicated that the final market weight of the animal was 
64 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
influenced by the stocking density (Figure 3.8), due to the impact on feed and water intake 
(Paul and Lallo 2014).  
As group size increased, aggressive behaviour was also reported to rise, resulting in 
animals sustaining lesions to their ears, bodies, tails and genitals (Szendro et al. 2009; 
Ibrahim, Marai and Ali 2004).  Increasing stocking densities have also been found to result 
in abnormalities in body and fur condition, but Iyeghe and Olorunju (2005) reported that 
that there is no significant interaction between increasing density and abrasions caused 
by bites. 
Common health problems
A sound proper biosecurity programme, along with preventive hygiene, cleaning and 
disinfection, and adequate ventilation must be put in place to maintain the right environment 
for healthy rabbits. Rabbits are very susceptible to digestive disturbances and fryers and 
post-wean kits losses may be greater than 40 percent due to diarrhoea. This can have a 
severe economic impact on commercial rabbit production in the tropics, and is one of the 
most common health problems associated with rabbits. There are two principal types of 
enteric diseases:
• Mucoid enteritis (caecal impaction)
• Enterotoxaemia caused by Clostridium perfringes and C. spiroforme proliferation 
in the caecum, both of which produce very potent toxins
Several factors lead to enteritis such as: the age, genetics and immune status of the 
animal, presence of pathogenic microbes in the environment, and environmental factors 
(e.g. micro-climate and heat stress, biosecurity and nutritional factors). Diets high in 
fermentable starch (such as carbohydrates) predispose post-weaned rabbits to increased 
incidences of enteritis, and can be prevented by feeding diets low in starch and high in 
fibre.  Enterotoxaemia is caused by carbohydrate overload of the hind gut, thus providing 
a substrate for the proliferation of pathogens (e.g. C. spiroforme requires the presence of 
glucose).
Fibre promotes normal motility of the hindgut so that where low fibre diets are fed, these 
promote hypo-motility resulting in prolonged retention time of digesta in the caecum and 
changes in caecal pH causing a proliferation of caecal microbes. In a review of several 
studies, Gidenne et al. (2010) reported that dietary fibre has a favourable effect on rabbit 
digestive health. In Trinidad, many rabbit farmers place a dry, un-husked coconut in 
the cages to ensure that animals obtain an adequate supply of dietary fibre in their diet. 
Excessive protein in the diet of the rabbit has also been linked to digestive disturbances, 
and Gidenne et al. (2010) also reported that a protein level of 1.8–1.9 g CP/ MJ DE seems 
adequate to prevent this.
| 65
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Common diseases of rabbits under humid tropical 
conditions 
Snuffles	
Symptoms: these include sneezing, watery eyes, white nasal discharge, difficulty 
breathing, and animals may be observed rubbing their noses.  This condition may also 
develop into pneumonia.
Causative agent: bacterial infection of the nasal sinus, caused by dust inhalation of 
mashed feeds given dry.
Control/treatment: consult a veterinarian for the prescribed antibiotic treatment (be 
aware if oral antibiotics are being administered, as these may interfere with the normal 
digestion of the gut). 
Coccididosis
Symptoms: include diarrhoea with mucous, bloated stomach, loss of appetite, slow 
growth rate/ weight gain.
Causative agents: parasitic infestation of the intestinal track caused by coccidia (Eimeria 
perforans, E. magna, E. media, E. irrisidua), and which is spread through faecal 
contamination.
Control/treatment: this involves the prevention of faecal contamination of feed and 
water, sanitation of housing, direct treatment of drinking water through the addition 
of 42.5 g of sulfaquinoxaline per 3.8 l water for 14 days, and repeated after seven days. 
Animals should be treated whether they show symptoms or not. 
Enteritis 
Symptoms: these are loss of appetite, reduced activity, dull eyes, rough fur coat, animals 
may appear bloated, diarrhoea and mucous in droppings. 
Causative agent: fermented or spoiled feeds and forages.
Control/treatment: this can be achieved using Terramycin tablets with Vitamin A, 
D and niacinamide (also called nicotinamide, a form of vitamin B3). Administering 
sulfasuxidine as recommended by a veterinarian can be used to treat the enteric infection. 
Ear canker (ear mange)
Symptoms: the disease is characterised by animals shaking their heads, scratching their 
ears, and the appearance of a brown scaly crust at base on inner ear.
Causative agents: ear mites (Psoroptes cuniculi and Notoedres cati var. cuniculi).
66 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
Control/ treatment: includes the removal of the scales and crust from inner ear and 
swabbing the area with a mixture of 1tsp. olive or mineral oil, and three drops of iodine/
paraffin once/day for three days, and repeated at ten days intervals.  Ivermectin can be 
used for tough cases or any other acaricide drops.
 Skin mange 
Symptoms: these are scaly skin, scarf (dandruff) itching and scratching and fur loss.
Causative agents: parasitic infection of the skin caused by mites (Cheyletiella 
parasitivorax and Sarcoptes scabiei).
Control/treatment: the use of a medicated shampoo and submerging the animal in a 
1.75 percent lime sulphur bath comprising lime sulphur (30 percent concentration) and 
laundry detergent and applied at a rate of one tsp./3.8 l water.    
Myxomatosis
Symptoms: these include inflammation and swelling of the eye, ears, nose and genitals, 
high fever, loss of appetite. Ears may also droop from weight of swelling.
Causative agent: a viral infection caused by the myxoma virus, which is easily transmitted 
by mosquitoes and fleas. Mature animals are the most affected, and the disease is 
usually fatal.
Control/treatment: diseased animals should be culled.
Buck teeth (malocclusion) 
Symptoms: in affected rabbits the incisors grow long and prevent the animal from 
closing its mouth thereby leading to reduced feed intake.
Causative agent: this is an inherited trait and not easily cured.
Control/treatment: rabbits displaying this trait should not be used as breeding stock. 
To reduce the incidence of malocclusion, the teeth of fryers should be trimmed. 
Conjunctivitis (pink eye) 
Symptoms: characteristic of this disease is the inflammation of the eyelids, from which 
a watery or thick and purulent discharge may be emitted.  The fur around the eyes may 
be wet and matted.
Causative agent: this is a bacterial infection of eyelids or irritation of the eye from smoke 
dust sprays or fumes. 
Control/treatment: consult a qualified veterinarian for recommendations on an 
appropriate antibiotic treatment.  Use warm water to clean the mucous from around eye.
| 67
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
 Sore hocks 
Symptoms: affected rabbits display infected or abscessed areas on hocks, and animals 
tend to shift their weight onto the non-affected foot. 
Causative agents: wet floors, irritation from wire rust or rough areas on floors, frequent 
thumping of feet.
Control/prevention: thus involves cleaning the area around the lesion and removing 
any blood or inflammation, applying the recommended antibiotic ointment, checking 
for uneven or damaged floors, and in severe cases, culling affected animals.
DUCK PRODUCTION
Common breeds of ducks used in the region
Domestic ducks fall into two genetic classes: the common duck (Anas platyrhynchos) and 
the Muscovy duck (Cairina moschata).  The Muscovy is a breed unrelated to the common 
duck and has its origins in Brazil, South America (neo-tropics), while the common duck 
has its origins in Asia.  The Pekin duck falls into the classification of common ducks, and 
along with the Muscovy, are the two most important commercial meat ducks worldwide. 
The cross between the common duck (Pekin) and the Muscovy is sterile, and is referred to 
as a ‘Mule’ duck, which is a fast growing meat-type bird.  Depending on the country, this 
cross is also called the Mulard, Mullard or Moulard duck. Although the origins of the Mule 
duck are uncertain, it is said to have been developed more than 250 years ago by farmers 
in Taiwan, who crossed Muscovy males with indigenous females in order to combine the 
high meat yield of the former, with the high laying rate of the latter.  Today, although Mule 
ducks are grown in large numbers in France and Eastern Europe, the principal production 
of Mule ducks for meat occurs in the Far East and South East Asia. 
Meat breeds used in the Caribbean
Pekin
This breed (Figure 3.9 – page 99) is probably the most popular duck breed reared for meat 
production. It is well adapted to confinement, making it ideal for commercial production. 
The Pekin duck is well known for its rapid growth rate and, can reach 3.2 kg in about 
eight weeks. The mature weight of this breed is about 3.6 and 4.1 kg for ducks and drakes, 
respectively.  The drakes are very fertile, and females are very good layers, producing 150 to 
200 eggs per year, with very good shell texture. Pekin eggs usually have good hatchability 
and are easily incubated artificially. The incubation period lasts for a duration of 21 days like 
chickens, as against 35–38 days for Muscovy ducks.  Nevertheless, a major disadvantage of 
68 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
this breed is that the Pekin is not a very good setter, and very seldom broods its own eggs 
or raises its young.  This represents a major limitation to small farmers who are forced to 
use a broody layer hen, (Muscovy ducks or a small artificial incubator). The Pekin duck can 
also be noisy and is very nervous.  
Muscovy
The Muscovy duck (Figure 3.10A and 3.10B) is the best multi-purpose (i.e. meat and 
eggs) breed of ducks.  It is normally the breed of choice by small and backyard producers in 
the region but is also reared by commercial duck farmers.  While there are several strains 
with varied colours, the white is preferred by commercial producers as they produce a 
high quality carcass. The carcass is larger than that of the Pekin duck, has less fat and 
larger pectoral muscles.  The drakes are approximately 40 percent heavier than the ducks 
at maturity, weighing up to 5.5 kg, and have a high breast meat yield.  The duck weighs 
approximately 3.2 kg. 
The Muscovy is classified as a fairly good layer, producing 120 eggs per year, which 
are medium to fine in texture, have good shell characteristics and excellent hatchability. 
The ducks lay 20 to 25 eggs per clutch and will proceed to hatch and rear their young.  If 
the number is restricted to about 20, it is not unusual for the duck to hatch and rear all. 
This makes them good setters with good mothering ability. They are therefore highly 
favoured by small farmers who use natural incubation. The meat has a gamely taste, is 
leaner than the Pekin, and is highly favoured by consumers. Since these ducks are nearly 
mute, this breed is favoured because it is not very noisy, but is however prone to praedial 
larceny.  The Muscovy duck has good grazing or foraging habits, and is therefore excellent 
for small backyard, semi-intensive or extensive production systems.
One disadvantage of this breed is that they exhibit sexual dimorphism. Males are 
larger than the females, which only attain 60 percent of the weight of males at maturity. 
The Muscovy is not well-suited to large commercial operations because its level of egg 
production is lower when compared to the Pekin.  The Muscovy can fly well, so it is normally 
recommended that pinioning be done, particularly where the unimproved strain is being 
reared. Like chickens, the wild unimproved strain of Muscovy likes to roost at nights.  The 
incubation period for the Muscovy egg is 35–38 days compared to the 21 days the Pekin, 
as stated above.  Because the young take a month longer to come into feather, a longer 
brooding time is required.  Since the plumage is less oily and downy than that of other 
ducks’ feathers, care has to be taken when putting the Muscovy on water, as it is possible 
that birds can drown, especially the heavy long-winged drake. The claws on the feet are 
sharper than those of other ducks, so that these birds must be handled carefully, especially 
the large drakes which are very temperamental and can cause damage to workers.
| 69
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Sexual dimorphism: differences in appearance between males and females of the 
same species, such as colour, shape, size, and structure.  
Pinioning: the act of surgically removing one pinion joint, namely the joint of a 
bird’s wing, farthest from the body, to prevent flight. 
Mule duck
Various strains of this duck, namely multi-coloured and white (which is preferred by 
commercial producers), can be found (Figures 3.11A and 3.11B). The Mule duck is fast 
growing and it grows relatively faster than Pekin and Muscovy ducks. Good lines can produce 
a live weight of 3.7 kg at ten weeks of age and at a FCR of 2.5 (i.e. 2.5 kg feed per kg live 
weight). This duck does not exhibit sexual dimorphism and produces a good quality carcass 
that is high in lean meat.  The meat also has a soft texture, and similar to that of the Pekin 
duck.  The carcass, while leaner than the Pekin, also retains sufficient subcutaneous fat to 
produce a succulent flavour following cooking.  Mule ducks show good disease resistance, 
but are sterile.
Research and development in Trinidad toward a 
sustainable industry 
Central Farms is the leading duck producer in Trinidad and Tobago, and also is a major 
partner in the duck research conducted locally. In collaboration with the Department of 
Food Production, UWI, St Augustine, a programme was developed to test improved duck 
breeds and strains from a major international duck breeder under our local conditions. 
In light of this, studies were undertaken on the performance of Pekin, Muscovy and Mule 
duck breeds from France and North America. The findings of this research are presented in 
Tables 3.3 and 3.4, which provide summaries of the performance of Pekin and Mule ducks 
and Mule ducks alone reared at Central Farms, respectively. Based on the results it was 
concluded that the Mule duck was the best breed to use locally for commercial production.
A major drawback to sustainable duck production however, is the reliance on imported 
soybean meal and corn. Further, the price increases to which these commodities are 
subjected, can threaten the sustainability of monogastric animal production in CARICOM 
(Lallo 1998).  Central Farms along with UWI has begun research into this issue since feed 
costs represent more than 60 percent of total production costs.  Work is being done to 
identify a feed supplement, which is based on by-products from different industries such 
70 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
as bakeries, snack and cereal manufacturers.  The use of ensiled fish waste, protein forages 
and legumes as a way forward to developing more sustainable feeding systems is also being 
explored.
Table 3.3: Summary of the performance for Pekin (PK1 and PK2) and Mule 
(MUC) ducks reared at Central Farms
Treatment/Breeds
Parameters                   Pekin Mule
PK1 PK2 MUC ±SEM P-Value
Initial Body Wt. (g) 53.3 66.3 70.7 1.7 <0.001
0-21 days:
Body weight (g) 1063 1146 1118 26 =0.093
Dry matter feed intake (g) 2119 2522 2549 79 =0.001
FCR (g DMI/g BW) 2.00 2.21 2.29 0.08 =0.099
0-49 days:
Body weight (g) 2337 2654 2180 60 <0.001
Dry matter feed intake (g) 6157 6514 5634 148 =0.001
FCR (g DMI/g BW) 2.64 2.46 2.59 0.05 =0.067
Carcass yield:
BW at slaughter (g) 2424 2704 2361 44 <0.001
Eviscerated carcass (g) 1960 2222 1965 37 <0.001
EVC (g/100g BW) 80.86 82.17 83.2 0.34 <0.001
Breast yield (g/100g EVC) 23.7 26.2 19.9 0.4 <0.001
Leg quarters (g/100g EVC) 17.1 17.9 16.9 0.3 =0.020
A local Pekin strain (PK1) (EVC - Eviscerated carcass); Pekin strain imported from USA (PK2); Mule duck strain from 
Canada (MUC)
Source: Lallo and Ramraj (2008)
| 71
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Table 3.4: Summary of the performance for Mule (MUC, MUS) ducks reared 
at Central Farms
Parameters MUC MUS ±SEM P-Value
Initial body weight (g) 70.8 78.1 ±1.4 =0.001
0-21 Days
Body weight (g) 921 998 17.3 =0.005
DM feed intake (g) 1089 2172 73 <0.001
FCR (g DMI/g BW) 1.18 2.18 0.78 =0.005
0-70 Days
Body weight (g) 3101 2987 97.1 =0.419
Dry matter feed intake (g) 7766 8076 243 =0.376
FCR (g DMI/g BW) 2.51 2.70 0.02 <0.001
Carcass Yield:
BW at slaughter 2950 2987 120 =0.827
Eviscerated carcass Wt. (g) 2412 2413 99 =0.992
Eviscerated carcass yield (g/100g BW) 78.5 80.8 2.6 =0.516
Breast yield (g/100 g EVC) 23.6 25.7 1.0 =0.125
Leg quarters (g/100 g EVC) 17.0 18.7 0.7 =0.097
Mule duck strain from Canada (MUC); Mule duck strain from USA (MUS)
Source: Lallo and Ramraj (2008)
Nutrition and feeding 
In order for ducks to grow at an optimum rate economically, their nutrient requirements 
for energy, protein, vitamins and minerals must be met.  These nutrients are needed each 
day to support maximum weight gain in the ducks, and therefore must be present in 
adequate amounts with no imbalance or excess. As against broilers, the growth of ducks is 
not influenced by dietary energy concentration and as such, energy must be provided at a 
level that is most economical (i.e. between 2,890 Kcal/kg and 3,200 Kcal/kg).  Since ducks 
are almost insensitive to excess protein in their feed, the utilisation of diets high in protein 
is ineffective in attempting to reduce fatness in ducks.  Feed restriction may reduce fatness, 
but will also result in a lower feed conversion. Protein levels in starter rations may range 
from 18 to 20 percent CP (crude protein) and in grower-finisher rations from 15 percent to 
18 percent CP.  Scott and Dean (1991) have noted that the ratio of energy to protein (ME: 
P) is also critical to duck performance. While French researchers have recommended ratios 
of 17.2 and 20.7 for starter and grower diets (Larbier and Leclercq 1994), the NRC (1994) 
72 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
suggested values of 13.0 and 18.8 for these various rations respectively. With respect to 
the vitamin and mineral requirements of ducks, in commercial diets these are supplied by 
premixes.  There may also be differences in the nutrient requirements among the Pekin, 
Mule and Muscovy. 
In intensive systems of production, because the ducks are confined, concentrate feeds 
are used to supply all their nutritional needs in order to promote a rapid growth rate and 
high quality carcass.  In semi-intensive systems the objective is similar, and while the ducks 
may forage and consume insects, the contribution of foraging to supplying their nutritional 
needs is insignificant.  In extensive or backyard production systems, the nutritional needs 
of the ducks are met to some extent by foraging and insect consumption.  In such systems 
however, a large hectarage of land is required, as only 20 to 25 ducks can be supported on 
0.4 ha (approximately one acre).  Production within this system is also further influenced 
by the quality and quantity of forage available, and some level of supplementation may 
therefore become necessary. Generally, large intensive commercial producers use duck 
feed prepared by feed millers made solely from imported ingredients, thereby posing a 
challenge to the sustainability of the industry. To address this, locally available agro by-
products can be used in the formulation of custom-made supplements, which can not only 
meet the nutrient requirements, but also reduce feed costs.
Duck feed must be stored away from rodents and insects and in a clean dry place to 
prevent contamination and mould growth. It should be used within three weeks of the 
manufactured date or sooner during the rainy season when it is hot and humid, to prevent 
vitamin loss and mould development.  Stale, bad smelling or mouldy feed should never be 
fed to ducks, as they are extremely sensitive to mould toxins; feed containing as little as 
30–40 ppb aflatoxin has been shown to impair protein utilisation. Mould toxins at levels 
between 60 and 80 ppb can cause damage to the duck’s digestive organs, liver, kidneys, 
muscles and plumage, and reduce growth and feed conversion ratio.  Most species of ducks 
seem very susceptible to heavy metals such as cadmium, lead, and arsenic, which are usually 
not present at toxic levels in uncontaminated commercial feeds.  Because the quality of feed 
ingredients is also very important, old vitamin/mineral packs should not be used.
Feed form is also important to duck performance due largely to the anatomical structure 
of the bill. The use of a high quality pelleted feed is important to optimise the growth rate 
and feed efficiency. Performance will decrease as the amount of fine material increases in 
a bag of pelleted feed, so that although ducks can be fed mash feed, a reduction in growth 
performance by approximately 10 percent, will be observed when compared with ducks 
fed pelleted feed. There will also be an increase in feed wastage. Ducklings should be fed a 
starter diet consisting of pellets of 3.2 mm in diameter, or as crumbles, and after two weeks 
of age, a grower diet consisting of pellets of 4.8 mm diameter can be fed. 
| 73
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Feeding and watering equipment
The anatomy and feeding habits of the ducks must be considered when designing or 
selecting feeding and watering equipment. Ducks use a shovel-like action when eating, 
which the feeders used should facilitate. An adult duck requires approximately 10 cm of 
feeder space, and feeders and drinkers should be evenly distributed throughout the pen and 
provided in quantities that would discourage overcrowding, particularly at feeding time. 
In production systems where feeders are placed outdoors, the feed may get wet when it 
rains and if left for extended periods could pose health risks to the ducks. Over exposure 
to sunlight can also affect the vitamin content in the feed so that it is advisable to place it 
in a covered area. Because of their susceptibility to mycotoxins, ducks should never be fed 
old or mouldy feed. Feeders should be emptied, cleaned and feed replaced on a daily basis. 
Compared to chickens, ducks eat a lot during a single feeding, as a result of their well-
developed oesophagus, which compensates for the absence of a crop. This however could 
result in birds choking if they do not have easy access to drinking water when eating, which 
also should be clean and cool.  Because of their drinking habits, water spillage from drinkers 
is quite common, which means that these should be so designed to enable the ducks to easily 
submerge the tip of the bill in them. Spillage can be minimised by correctly adjusting the 
water level in the drinkers, and placing drinkers at the appropriate height. Where ducks 
are reared on deep litter, it is advisable to place the drinkers on wire grids. Nipple drinkers 
can also be used to help reduce wet litter problems. Where these are used however, they 
should be checked regularly to ensure that they are all functional. 
Nutritional disorders
In ducks, niacin deficiency can be recognised by bowlegs, curled toes and swollen knees. 
Treatment includes the use of a vitamin supplement rich in niacin.  Vitamin D and calcium 
deficiencies lead to lameness, thereby preventing affected birds from accessing feeders and 
drinkers, leading to a decrease in feed intake.  A vitamin supplement rich in vitamin D3 can 
be used to correct this problem.  The main symptoms of a vitamin E deficiency are ducks 
falling on their side and paddle, twisted neck.  Cannibalism may be caused by imbalances in 
certain nutrients, such as methionine, along with overcrowding in pens.  Where this occurs, 
affected ducks should be immediately removed and isolated.  To prevent cannibalism, the 
beaks of Muscovy and Mule ducks should be trimmed at two weeks of age.
74 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
SYSTEMS FOR DUCK PRODUCTION AND HOUSING
Main features of duck production systems
Ducks can be reared under a number of different production systems, either as a single 
enterprise or in combination with other livestock, including fish. However, in most 
commercial farms ducks are reared as a single enterprise. Ducks use water for swimming, 
wading and mating, but the provision of water for these activities is not absolutely necessary 
for successful duck production. However, when water is available, it enables the ducks to 
dissipate an appreciable amount of heat into water via their feet and bills, which aids in 
reducing heat stress.  The type of production system and housing depend on a number of 
factors such as availability of credit, labour, technology and also the market requirements. 
The three main systems used for duck production include: 
• Intensive system in which ducks are totally confined 
• Semi-intensive system in which ducks are partially confined
• Extensive system in which ducks are reared on large hectarages  
The two most widely used systems on commercial farms are the intensive (Figure 3.12A 
and 3.12B) and semi-intensive systems (Figure 3.12C and 3.12D), which to varying extents 
involve a restriction in the floor space provided for the ducks. Careful attention is also paid 
to the provision of a high quality, nutritionally balanced diet, in order to attain efficient 
feed conversion, rapid growth rate and the maintenance of a profitable enterprise. The 
genetic quality of the stock, as previously mentioned, as well as the health maintenance 
programme is also important areas of focus.  In the extensive system, management of these 
parameters is not as rigid.  Ducks are also kept in integrated systems (Figure 3.13) e.g. in 
combination with aquaculture or with crop such as rice, commonly seen in Asia. There is 
also the subsistence or backyard system of production, where ducks are kept mainly for 
household use and are fed household scraps and sometimes allowed to forage (Figure 3.14).
Housing designs used in duck production 
Many different housing designs are used in both the intensive and semi-intensive 
systems.  Ducks may be housed either directly on a dirt floor or on litter material.  Deep 
litter floors are preferred compared to dirt floors because the ducks are much cleaner 
and the environment is generally much better for the animals’ welfare.  They may also be 
housed in cages with slatted or wire floor.  Each of these floor systems has its associated 
advantages and disadvantages. For example, while the dirt and litter floors are cheaper 
to establish, they are more difficult to clean and puddles of dirty water can develop. The 
ducks are also in direct contact with their droppings in this system. Such floors therefore 
| 75
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
represent potential sources for the spread of diseases within the flock. Slatted and wire 
floors on the other hand are more expensive to establish but provide additional benefits, 
including higher stocking densities, cleaner ducks, and reduced risk of disease transmission 
due to direct contact with droppings. 
The intensive and semi-intensive systems have similarities. They both provide some 
covered area for the ducks, especially for laying and brooding. They also allow for separation 
by age or stage of production, whereby for example, the breeders can be separated from 
those ducks being fattened for market. This is particularly important if the sale of live 
animal takes place on-farm, as buyers generally want to purchase the larger ducks which 
are normally the breeders.  This practice could however eventually has a negative impact on 
the quality of the breeding stock, since a number of associated parameters such as growth 
rate and market weight are influenced by the genetic quality of the breeding stock.  
BREEDING STOCK MANAGEMENT
Production for the meat market
Selection of breeding stock
Ducks for use as breeding stock should be healthy and alert, have good body conformation 
e.g. be full breasted, have a deep keel and with good width between their legs, and have 
attained the required weight for age for the given breeds.  A major objective of the breeding 
unit is the production of fertile eggs with high hatchability, but its ultimate objective is to 
produce healthy ducklings to be reared to give high carcass yield and quality.
Nutrition
Once selected as breeding stock the ducks should be fed with this objective in mind, 
but not be allowed to become too fat. If the ducks become too fat, this negatively impacts 
the level of egg production, while in drakes, their ability to mate is affected, something 
which in turn, affects the hatchability of the eggs produced. The feeding programme and 
general nutrition of breeders must therefore be carefully monitored in order to maintain 
this delicate balance.
Duck: drake ratio 
A key factor in the achievement of the objective of a breeding unit is the provision of 
the correct ratio of ducks to drakes, with a range of 5–8 ducks to one drake being usually 
sufficient. Breeder ducks in intensive and semi intensive systems, as well as in the extensive 
or backyard systems may be kept for four to five years. Oftentimes, when younger drakes 
76 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
are mated to older ducks in their first breeding season, because of sexual immaturity egg 
fertility may be affected, so that egg fertility in the flock should be regularly monitored. 
As such it is therefore advisable to use older males with older females and younger males 
with females of their own age.  
Lighting and egg production 
While ducks may start to lay at 23–28 weeks of age, in a well-managed flock laying 
can start at 21 weeks. Drakes used for breeding should be at least 27 weeks old. Similar 
to commercial layers, egg production in ducks could be stimulated by the use of a proper 
lighting programme, which involves increasing the number of light hours to around 14, 
approximately three weeks before the onset of laying. During the laying period, light 
hours should be maintained at about 16 hours. The increase in feed quality and quantity 
will also bring ducks into lay, and the ration should be changed from one used to support 
maintenance, to one for breeders. Egg production usually peaks about five to six weeks after 
the onset of lay, and in most cases if properly managed, is maintained around 50 percent 
for about five months. Unlike layer chickens, ducks do not like to perch. Therefore nest 
boxes should be placed at ground level. 
Nest facilities for breeders
The provision of adequate nest boxes for breeders is important. A ratio of one nest box 
for every three ducks is recommended. Nest boxes should be about 35 cm wide x 43 cm 
deep x 33 cm high) and must allow only one duck to enter and sit. In order to minimise the 
number of dirty eggs, the nest boxes should be placed in the pens about one to two weeks 
before the onset of lay, thereby allowing soon to be laying ducks to become familiar with 
them. A layer of about 10 cm of clean, dry litter should be maintained in the nest boxes at 
all times. Droppings from the ducks should not be allowed to build up in and/or on the nest 
boxes, which should be located in a sheltered and isolated area to minimise disturbance, 
especially during brooding.
Egg collection, storage and handling
It is possible to produce fertile eggs and have a poor hatch, as factors other than fertility, 
also impact on hatchability, for example, egg collection, storage and handling.  Every effort 
should therefore be made to produce clean eggs and store them properly. Provision of an 
adequate number of nest boxes, proper nest box management, frequent collection of eggs, 
proper cleaning of any dirty eggs, reduced length of storage and proper storage conditions 
for fertile eggs all help to improve hatchability. Frequent egg collection also minimises 
| 77
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
soiled and cracked eggs. Proper egg storage is important to ensure that fresh, vigorous 
embryos are placed in the incubator or under the broody duck. If eggs are to be stored for 
more than two weeks they should be turned at least three times per day to avoid the yolk 
sticking to the shell. Eggs should be stored at 13°C, a relative humidity of 75 percent, and 
with the small end downward. 
Artificial incubation
The conditions during incubation impact directly on the percentage hatchability, when 
artificial incubation is used.  It is critical that the manufacturer’s guidelines be followed in 
relation  to the maintenance of the correct temperature and relative humidity, regular turning 
of the eggs, and their timely removal from the incubator to the setter. Most commercial 
incubators automatically regulate the temperature, humidity and turning of the eggs and are 
also designed to alert the operator if the equipment malfunctions. Nevertheless, continuous 
monitoring of the equipment remains critical to the success of the hatch. 
Candling of eggs
Not all fertilised eggs develop into ducklings, as some embyos may die right after 
fertilisation, while others die during various stages of incubation. Candling will help to 
determine whether there is a fertility or hatchability problem. The best time to candle is 
between the 17th and 18th day of incubation.  With Muscovy ducks candling can be done on 
the seventh day, and again on the 32nd day of incubation, while for Pekin and other breeds, 
this can be performed on the seventh and 18th days. When candling, a light is shone through 
the egg so that the interior of the egg can be observed through the shell. Eggs that appear 
clean with no signs of embryonic development are called ‘clears’. Because some eggs may 
have been fertilised but the embryos may have died too early to be detected by candling, 
they will have to be examined (‘break-out’) for evidence of embryonic development. If 
15–20 percent of the clear eggs are “broken out” and show no sign of embryonic growth, 
the problem is fertility. While a dead embryo will generally show as a dark spot stuck to 
the shell membrane, a live one will be located near the air space as a dark spot with blood 
vessels radiating away from it. 
Hatchability: the percentage of fertilised eggs that hatch into ducklings.
78 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
Natural incubation
Many small farmers use broody ducks to hatch their eggs, so that for these farmers, the 
brooding tendency is very important. Since the duck usually becomes broody after she lays a 
clutch of eggs, she can be allowed to sit on her eggs in a nest box in a relatively undisturbed 
area. She will leave the nest box for food and water, and should have easy access to both. 
The brooding tendency is therefore an important aspect of the duck’s mothering ability, 
and in this regard, the Muscovy is a much better mother than the Pekin duck, which would 
seldom sit on her eggs. Some farmers also use broody hens (chickens) to incubate duck eggs. 
If chickens are used it may be necessary to sprinkle the eggs daily with lukewarm water to 
achieve a higher humidity. The incubation period for the Muscovy is 35 days while Pekin 
eggs take 21 days to hatch. Brooding tendency is less of less importance to large farmers who 
hatch their eggs using incubators, and whose main objective is to have the ducks lay as many 
eggs as possible without going broody.  As such, these producers would prefer the Pekin.
Broodiness: the natural tendency of the duck to set on her eggs until they hatch 
into ducklings.
Management of newly hatched ducklings 
Minimising mortality in early hatched ducklings
Duckling mortality impacts directly on the profitability of the farm, and should therefore 
be minimised by farmers as far as possible.  A number of factors contribute to mortality 
levels, including brooding conditions, trampling of early-hatched ducklings by their mothers, 
feeding and nutrition, diseases and predators. It is advisable to remove early-hatched 
ducklings from their mother to reduce trampling and mortality of early-hatched ducklings, 
and also to encourage the mother to sit on the remaining eggs until they hatch. 
Natural brooding of ducklings 
Brooding refers to the care and management of the newly hatched ducklings for the first 
few weeks, and can be done naturally.  The duck huddles the ducklings under her to keep 
them warm, especially at nights, and protect them from danger. Broody hens (chickens) 
also do a good job, but they should be confined since the hens are likely to tire the ducklings 
by wandering too far. Wandering may also expose the young ducklings to predators. 
| 79
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Artificial brooding of ducklings
Artificial brooding conditions for ducklings are similar to those for brooding layer and 
broiler chickens and any type of equipment that is suitable for chickens is also appropriate 
for ducks. Brooding involves the provision of heat to keep the ducklings warm because 
their temperature control mechanism (i.e. thermoregulation system) is not fully developed, 
making them susceptible to chills. A 250-watt infrared brooding lamp, hung about 45 cm 
above the floor can be used in the brooder. If a hoover is used, it should be hung 10 cm 
to 13 cm higher than the height used for chickens. When infrared brooding lamps are not 
available, many farmers with small production systems use incandescent light bulbs for 
brooding. The following are some temperature recommendations for brooding ducklings:
Week 1: 29.4°C - 32.2°C
Week 2: 23.9°C to 26.7°C 
Week 3 and beyond: 21°C
It is critical to monitor the ducklings during the first five days post hatch. If ducklings 
experience heat stress, they will spread out away from the heat source, pant and make a 
high pitch chirping noise. When they are too cold, ducklings will huddle under the heat 
source in groups, something that can result in crushing if they pile too high in the groups. 
It is important to observe the ducklings’ response to the heat provided; an even distribution 
in the brooding area is a good indicator of their comfort.  
The brooding area should be dry, well-ventilated, draught-free, protected from predators 
and provide sufficient floor space for the rapidly growing ducklings. Wire or litter floors 
should be used during brooding. Wire is preferred because it reduces of the risk of 
aspergillosis associated with the use of some types of litter. Where litter material is used 
on the floor it should be about 10–15 cm deep. The litter should be treated for fungus, 
as this grows well on wet litter and ducklings are extremely susceptible to the aflatoxins 
produced by some fungi. The litter for young ducklings should therefore be kept dry at all 
times. Aflatoxins could cause high mortality and morbidity, and decreased growth rate of 
ducklings. In Trinidad and Tobago for example, the best brooding results have been obtained 
when specially built crates with rubberised or plastic coated wire mesh no more than 2 
cm in diameter have been used for this purpose. The crates also provide the ducks with 
protection against predators such as dogs, cats and rodents, and also prevent aspergillosis 
since no litter is used.
80 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
Feeding the young duckling
Care should be taken with the feeding of ducklings as mortality may result from starvation 
or from choking on dry feed. Starvation can arise when ducklings receive insufficient feed, 
are unable to access the feed provided, or if the feed particles are too big for the young 
duck to consume. If the ducklings do not have enough water to drink while eating the dry 
concentrate feed they may choke and die.  Young ducklings should be fed a duck starter 
ration in the appropriate feeders, and must be provided with good quality (clean and cool) 
drinking water. During the first few days, the feed may be placed in flat feeders, which 
should not be placed on a smooth surface, as this could cause the young ducklings to slip 
and sustain leg injuries. Drinkers should be placed on wire grids to minimise wetting of 
the litter.  Feeders and drinkers should be adjusted so that ducklings have easy access to 
them. Ducklings should be given fresh feed each day, and old or mouldy feed must never be 
fed.    Drinkers should be located close to the feeders and should be washed and sanitised 
daily. The rinse water should not be poured in the house, but preferably into a bucket and 
removed from the pen to help maintain a clean healthy environment for the ducks. Drinkers 
and feeders should be checked daily to ensure that they are working properly.
DUCK HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY
Food quality and human health issues have become more important in recent years, in 
addition to which, the concept of food value has changed.  For example, high energy meat 
sources are less desirable because of excess calorie, and health concerns about total fat 
intake in the human diet.  In the area of food safety, the primary concerns revolve around 
the food-borne illnesses caused by chemical contaminants and pathogenic bacteria.  It is 
therefore important to keep ducks healthy at all times.  A healthy and disease-free flock will 
provide good returns to farmers in the long run and a wholesome product to consumers. 
In order to achieve these objectives, farmers should have a disease-free farm, purchase 
disease-free ducklings, restrict the movement of visitors, disinfect all shed and utensils 
after every batch, and follow the advice of a veterinarian to prevent sickness and disease 
in the flock.  The farm should be kept free of any materials that harbour vermin and insect 
pests. Biosecurity, as with all poultry, is of great importance on the duck farm and the key 
to maintaining a healthy flock (Box 3.3).
| 81
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Box 3.3: Biosecurity Measures to be Observed When Rearing Ducks
These include: 
•	 Sourcing or producing healthy ducklings 
•	 Conducting proper brooding by providing a clean, dry and warm brooding area
•	 Cleaning water tanks, drinkers, and sanitising drinking water
•	 Employing proper sanitation practices throughout the farm
•	 Maintaining a closed flock i.e. practice an all-in-all-out system
•	 Providing a comfortable, stress-free environment
•	 Rearing ducks on wire or slatted floors wherever possible
•	 Carefully selecting the location of duck farms 
•	 Minimising the number of visitors 
•	 Providing high quality duck feeds
•	 Providing facilities for proper feed storage
•	 Consulting the animal health personnel and established laboratory in cases of 
infections or diseases
•	 Increasing your knowledge of the species and training of workers
Ducks raised in small numbers and in relative isolation, suffer little from diseases, but 
where there are large flocks, diseases may be extremely widespread.  Muscovy and mule 
ducks appear to be resistant to many diseases common to Pekin and mallard-type ducks. 
The list of common diseases which follows is far from complete both in number and details, 
and should not be used as a substitute for accurate diagnosis and treatment by competent 
animal health personnel.  Farmers should only administer antibiotics and vaccine when 
absolutely necessary or on the advice of animal health personnel.  Failure to do this could 
result in the introduction of new pathogenic organisms into the environment.
Common health and disease problems in ducks
Mycotoxins
These are a group of toxic chemicals produced by moulds or fungi growing on certain 
feedstuff or litter material. Ducks are extremely susceptible to mycotoxins, especially 
aflatoxins, and this is therefore a major concern throughout the duck industry, especially 
in the humid tropics. Recognising this susceptibility and the potential for losses in the 
duck industry, good feed mill manufacturing practices will prevent the use of sub-optimal 
ingredients and duck rations are enhanced with both mould inhibitors and mycotoxins 
binders.  Good management, storage and handling and timely usage of feed on the 
82 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
farm will also go a long way to minimise this problem.  Aspergillosis, a fungal infection 
of the respiratory tract also referred to as brooders’ pneumonia, is a common disease 
in ducks resulting from the inhalation of fungal spores in the air and by aflatoxins 
produced by fungi of the Aspergillus species, such as A. fumigatus and A.	flavus. It is 
more common in ducklings reared on deep litter, especially on bagasse-based litter. 
Common signs include: reluctance to move, decreased feed intake, differential growth 
patterns in flock, ruffled feathers, whitish diarrhoea, difficult breathing or gasping, 
accelerated breathing, emaciation and death. Treatment of this condition is expensive 
and usually ineffective. Mortality from Aspergillosis can be quite high, especially in 
ducklings. Good litter management and a dry brooder house are absolutely essential 
to help prevent this disease.  
Botulism
This disease is caused by the bacterium Clostridium botulism, an anaerobic spore 
forming organism, which grows in decaying plant and animal material particularly in 
hot humid climates.  Stagnant pond water with decaying carcasses and vegetation are 
sources of the bacteria, which produces toxins that can cause botulism, and may result 
in high mortality in the flock. Ducks feeding on materials or drinking water containing 
the deadly toxins produced by the bacteria tend to lose control of their neck muscles 
and they usually drown if a swimming facility is available. The disease occurs both in 
young and adult stock.  Common signs of botulism are weakness, paralysis of the neck 
muscles, and death, usually within 24 hours. The removal and/or isolation of birds 
from sources of contamination such as dead birds, is important in the control of this 
disease.  Maintenance of clean facilities and the quality of the drinking water are very 
important in the prevention of this disease.  
Yolk sac infection
Common signs include depression, septicaemia, navel infection, and some level of 
mortality within the first week of brooding, and ducklings also look and feel wet. Post 
mortem reveals the remains of a bluish or blackish yolk sac, something that is commonly 
observed in ducklings hatched from eggs on the floor or otherwise dirty eggs.  While 
the infection may be caused by different bacteria, the Escherichia coli organism, which 
is normally associated with environmental hygiene, is the common causative agent 
associated with this disease.  Prevention of this disease involves paying attention to 
good hygiene with respect to housing, nest box management, the hatchery and flock 
in general.
| 83
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Coccidiosis
Although not as troublesome as in chickens, this disease causes some measure of distress 
occasionally in flocks. The organism causing the disease in ducks is different from those 
causing it in chickens.
External parasites (lice and mites)
External parasites are generally observed in ducks subjected to very poor management. 
They cause discomfort to the ducks along with varying levels of damage to the feathers. 
With careful examination, they can be seen at the base of the feathers, and in cases of 
heavy infestation, can be easily observed.  
Hardware disease 
While foraging, ducks may ingest undesirable foreign bodies such as nails and small 
pieces of wire. These items may puncture and cause damage to the internal organs. 
Affected animals may appear sick and post mortem examination generally reveals the 
extent of the injury. Similar items may also penetrate the duck’s body and cause injury 
to the skin.
Management-related problems
Blisters – these usually occur on the footpads and breasts, and are usually caused by 
ammonia emanating from poorly managed deep litter. While the blisters on the footpads 
cause discomfort to the ducks and affect their access to feed and water, breast blisters affect 
carcass quality.
Sticky eye - this is caused by dust or feed particles getting into the eyes of the duckling, 
resulting in around the eyes appearing wet and sticky.  Providing the birds with containers 
of sanitised water to wash their bills assists in alleviating this problem.
Common duck diseases
Duck cholera – this disease causes high mortality in adult and young stock, and can be 
controlled by strict sanitation.
Duck virus enteritis (duck plague) – an acute fatal disease that affects ducks as well as 
geese, swans and other aquatic birds.  It is caused by a filterable virus that is transmissible 
by contact, and commonly occurs where water is available for swimming.
New duck disease (infectious serositis) – one of the most serious diseases affecting 
ducklings, caused by the bacterium Moraxella anatipestifer. Symptoms resemble those 
of chronic respiratory disease of chickens, and stricken ducklings fall over on their sides 
and backs.
84 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
Virus hepatitis – serious outbreaks of virus hepatitis can cause 80–90 percent mortality 
in flocks of ducklings. This highly contagious disease strikes swiftly and without warning 
and affects ducklings from one to five weeks of age. A vaccine, which can be administered 
to female breeding stock is available.
MARKETING
Marketing and processing ducks
Ducks are mainly marketed as whole birds in Trinidad and Tobago through pluck shops 
(cottage processors) or as live birds sold at the farm gate.  Recently however, an increasing 
trend has been observed whereby local duck meat is cut up and sold in ‘tray-paks’ in 
supermarkets. Eight to ten hours prior to slaughter, feed should be withheld from the 
birds, but water may be provided up to the time of killing.  Clean and un-crowded rearing, 
transportation and holding facilities will help to prevent bruising, cutting, stress and other 
factors that cause poor market acceptability.  Ducks should be transported in crates or herded 
into a trailer-type transport, when the slaughtering facility is not done on farm. Construction 
of elaborate slaughtering facilities is justified only for large commercial operations.  If live 
markets are not available, small farm flocks can be processed by using facilities similar to 
those used for chickens (i.e. pluck shops/cottage processing) (Figure 3.16).  
When slaughtering ducks, birds can either be hung by the feet, or placed in a special 
slaughtering funnel.  Using a long, thin, sharp knife, a cut is made across the outside of the 
throat high up on the neck and just under the lower bill.  This will sever the jugular vein 
and allow swift and complete bleeding. When bleeding has ceased, birds can be scalded by 
immersing them in hot water (60°C) for three minutes and de-feathered immediately after 
scalding.  All remaining pinfeathers should also be removed by grasping them between the 
thumb and a dull knife and pulling sharply.  Under local cottage processing it is common 
to flame off pinfeathers.
In large commercial slaughterhouses, ducks are dipped in a molten wax after they have 
been de-feathered.  The wax hardens when the birds are immersed in cold water, and the 
pin feathers are extracted when the wax coating is removed from the carcass.  The wax can 
be reused if it is melted and the feathers are separated out.  Small quantities of wax can be 
purchased for use in small slaughtering operations, however it is highly combustible and 
care must be taken to prevent it from coming in contact with open flames.
After de-feathering, birds must be eviscerated immediately. The eviscerated carcass is 
then thoroughly washed, and placed in slush ice for rapid cooling, and the giblets placed 
in the body cavity of the chilled birds.  If birds are to be marketed frozen, they should be 
| 85
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
packaged in shrinkable plastic bags (Figure 3.17). Protocols and standards are currently 
being developed for CARICOM with respect to cottage processing that cottage processors 
of ducks will have to adopt. Further, packaging and labelling requirements are also being 
developed for farmers’ use.
FARM RECORDS AND ECONOMICS
Record keeping
 The three main purposes for keeping records are to: check on performance, guide 
future decisions, and provide planning data.  Farmers must keep proper records if they are 
to effectively run a profitable duck enterprise, as flock production records are a necessary 
part of good flock management. Figure 3.18A represents a growing ducks record sheet, 
and provides a summary of flock behaviour from day old to market.  Records on mortality 
and feed consumption are kept on a daily basis, but summarised on a weekly basis.  Body 
weight of birds is monitored on a weekly basis, and this weekly weight can be plotted to 
give a visual analysis of how birds are performing, and can be compared with the expected 
performance based on the breeder’s standard. 
Records should reveal the strengths of a business that can be exploited and the weaknesses 
that must be removed.  It is therefore important for the duck producer to understand that 
this enterprise is not only a biological entity but a business and an economic entity.  Thus, 
the cost of production and returns must also be a part of the recording systems, as illustrated 
in Figure 3.18B, which outlines the parameters to be considered in evaluating the cost of 
production of broiler ducks.
86 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
 Figure 3.18A: Flock production record sheet  
 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES 
 DEPARTMENT OF FOOD PRODUCTION  
 BROILER DUCK RECORD CHART 
 	
   	
   	
   	
   Breed/	
   	
  
Farmer	
   	
   Pen	
  No.	
   No.	
  of	
  
 Ducks	
  
 Date	
  Started	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
  
Harvest	
  Date	
   	
   Hatchery	
   Egg	
  
 Supplier	
  
MORTALITY	
   DAILY	
  FEED	
  USE/kg	
  
 
 Week	
   Week	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   Week	
   Weekly	
   Total	
   Week	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   Week	
   Avg 
Starting	
   Ending	
   Total	
   To	
   Starting	
   Ending	
   Wts 
 	
   Date	
   Pen 
1	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
 
 2	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
 3	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
 4	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
 
5	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
Table 11 List of Parameters for Evaluating Cost of Production and Returns  
6	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
  
  
 7	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
 8	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
 9	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
 
10	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
 
 11	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
 12	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
    
 13	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
      
 	
  
 
 
 
 
 
| 87
 
 
 
  Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
 
FigFuigruer 3e .1198:B F:l oTcekm pprloadtuec ftoiorn e rveaclouradt i  ng the cost of broiler duck production 
 
  
 
INCOME:	
   $	
  Value	
  
	
   
Birds	
  sold	
   	
  
M anure	
  (if	
  sold)	
  
F eathers	
  (if	
  sold)	
  
Total	
  Income	
  
	
    	
  
( a)	
  	
   VARIABLE	
  COSTS	
   	
  
1. Ducklings	
  	
   	
  
2 . Feed	
  
3 . Labour	
  
4. Litter	
  (if	
  used)	
  
5 . Medication	
  
6 . Veterinary	
  Services	
  
7. Utilities	
  
 � Water	
  	
  
 � Electricity	
  
8. Repairs	
  and	
  Maintenance	
  
9 . Transportation	
  	
  
T OTAL	
  VARIABLE	
  COST	
  (add	
  items	
  1	
  to	
  9)	
  
	
   	
  
( b)	
   FIXED	
  COSTS:	
   	
  
1 . Salary	
   	
  2. Depreciation	
  
 � Housing	
  
 � Equipment	
  
 3. Insurance	
  (if	
  paid)	
  
 4. Miscellaneous	
  cost	
  
� Bank	
  Charges	
  
 � Land	
  Charges	
  
 5. Interest	
  Charges	
  
 TOTAL	
  FIXED	
  COST	
  (all	
  items	
  1	
  to	
  5)	
   	
  
 TOTAL	
  COST	
  (Add	
  Total	
  Variable	
  +	
  Total	
  Fixed	
  Cost)	
   	
  
	
   	
  
88 |
Small Animal Production Systems: Rabbits and Ducks
REFERENCES
Alnaimy, A., I. Fayez, M.Habeeb, and M. Marai. 1994. Thermoregulation in Rabbits. In 
Rabbit production in Hot Climates, ed. M. Baseiga and I.F.M. Marai, 33–41. Zaragaza: 
CIHEAM. 
Blas, E., and T. Gidenne. 2010. Digestion of Starch. In The nutrition of the Rabbit, ed. C. 
de Blas and J. Wiseman, 19–38. London: CABI Publishing.
El- Kholy, K. 2011.  Amelioration of Heat Stress in Rabbits. USA: Lap Lambert.
Gidenne, T., R. Carabaño, J. Garcia, and C. de Blas. 2010. Fibre Digestion. In The Nutrition 
of the Rabbit, ed. C. de Blas and J. Wiseman, 66–82. London: CABI Publishing.
Grimaud F. 2004. Rearing Guides for Roasting Pekin, Hytop Mule and Broiler Muscovy 
Ducks. http://www.grimaud.fr/france/produits/pekin/en.html. Accessed March 7, 
2013.
Habeeb, A.A.M., I.F.M. Marai, A.M. El-Maghawry, and A.E. Gad. 1997.  Growing Rabbits 
as Affected by Salinity in Drinking Water under Winter and Hot Summer Conditions 
of Egypt. Egyptian Journal of Rabbit Science 7:81–94.
Ibrahim F., M. Marai and R.A. Ali. 2004. Rabbit Behavioral Response to Climatic and 
Managerial Condtions. Arch. Tierz Dummerstorf 47, no. 5:469–82.
Lebas, F., P. Coudert, H. De Rochambeau, and R. Thébault. 1997. The Rabbit Husbandry, 
Health and Production. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United 
Nations (FAO). 
Lallo, C.H.O. 1998. Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Monogastric (Pig and Poultry) 
Production for the Caribbean. In Agriculture in the Caribbean: Issues and Challenges 
– Proceedings of UWI Ag. 50 Conference 1, August 19–21, 1998, edited by Lawrence 
A. Wilson, 62–74. St Augustine, Trinidad: CEPAT.
Lallo, C.H.O., and S. Ramraj. 2008. The Performance of Improved Pekin and Mule Duck 
Strains Reared under Intensive Conditions in a Humid Tropical Environment. In 
Overcoming Challenges to Developing Sustainable Agri-Food Systems in the Tropics 
– Proceedings of the International Congress on Tropical Agriculture, November 30–
December 5, 2008, ed. Lawrence Wilson. St Augustine, Trinidad: UWI.  
Larbier, M., and B. Leclercq. 1994.  Nutrition and Feeding of Poultry. Translated and edited 
by Julian Wiseman. UK: Nottingham University Press. 
Iyeghe T., and S.A.S. Olorunju. 2005. Effect of Stocking Density on the Performance of 
Growing Rabbits in the Semi-humid Tropics. Tropicultura 23, no. 1:19–23.
Leng, R.A. 2008. Digestion in the Rabbit: A New Look. Mekarn Workshop 2008. Organic 
Rabbit Production from Forages.  http://www.meharn.orgprorab./leng.htm. Accessed 
March 7, 2013.
| 89
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
NRC. 1994. Nutrient Requirement of Poultry.  rev. ed. USA: National Academy of Science.
———. 1996. Nutrient Requirement of Rabbits.  rev. ed. USA: National Academy of Science.
Paul, A., and C.H.O. Lallo. 2014. The Performance of Growing Rabbits Fed a Commercial 
Concentrate with Different Forages under Humid Tropical Conditions. Tropical 
Agriculture (Trinidad) 91:173–178. 
Ram, C., and C.H.O. Lallo. 2014. The Performance of Growing Rabbits Fed a Commercial 
Concentrate with Different Forages under Humid Tropical Conditions. Unpublished 
Report.  
Rastogi, R.K. 1991. Doe and Kit Performance in a Small Scale Population from Subtropical 
Trinidad. World Rabbit Science 9, no. 2:65–68.
Scott, M. L., and W.F. Dean. 1991.  Nutrition and Management of Ducks. Ithaca, New York: 
Cornell University. 
Szendrö, Z., and D.A. Zotte. 2011. Effect of Housing Condition on Production and Behavior 
of Growing Meat Rabbits. Livestock Science 137:296–303.
Szendrö Z., Z. Princz, R. Romvari, L. Locsmandi, A. Szabo, G. Bazar, I. Radni, E. Biro-
Nemeth, Z. Matics and I. Nagy. 2009. Effects of Group and Stocking Density on 
Productive Carcass Meat Quality and Aggression Traits of the Growing Rabbit. World 
Rabbit Science 17:153–62.
Verspecht, A., L. Maertens, F. Vanonacker, F.A.M. Tuyttens, G. Van Huylenbroeck, and W. 
Verbeke. 2011. Economic Impact of Decreasing Stocking Densities in Broiler Rabbit 
Production Based on Belgian Farm Data. World Rabbit Sci. 19:123–32.
Villamide, M.J., M.J. Nicodemus, M.J. Fraga, and R. Carabaño. 2010. Protein Digestion. 
In The Nutrition of the Rabbit, ed. C. de Blas and J. Wiseman, 39–55. London: CABI 
Publishing.
Yakubu A., M.M. Adua, and H. Adamude. 2008. Welfare and Hematological Indices of 
Weaner Rabbits as Affected by Stocking Density. In Proceedings 9th World Rabbit 
Congress, 1269–1273, June 10–13, 2008, Verona, Italy. 
Yakubu, A., and M.M. Adua. 2010. Effect of Stocking Density on Growth Performance, 
Carcass Ualities and Cost-Benefit of Weaned Rabbits in the Savanna Zone of Nigeria. 
African Journal of Animal and Biomedical Science 5:1–4.
 
90 |
 Women play key roles in record keeping on livestock farms
Caribbean women are responsible for selling 12-50 percent of the region’s local 
fruits & vegetables.
Marketing has historically provided women and | 91
their families with a source of income.
CHAPTER ONE
Small producers do adopt safe and regulated practices.
Women dominate in post-harvest and packaging activities.
When given the opportunity women excel in agriculture science.
92 |
Attending to seedlings in hydroponics system
Grafting mango, Nevis
| 93
CHAPTER TWO
Maintaining drip irrigation line in onion
Pruning tomato under greenhouse, 
Jamaica
94 |
Banner at EARTH University in Costa Rica. 
Young Stars 4H Club members in their hydroponic project in Trinidad.
| 95
Figure 3.1: Carcass of a rabbit fed forage with reduced concentrate levels
Figure 3.2: Doe accepting male for mating 
96 |
CHAPTER THREE
Figure 3.3: Nest with new born kits 
Figure 3.4: Proper method of holding growing rabbits
| 97
Figure 3.5: Proper method of holding adult /heavy rabbits
Figure 3.6: Open sided house at Aripo Livestock Station, Trinidad 
98 |
Figure 3.7: Wire mesh cages with feeding facilities inside
Figure 3.8: Limited feeder space and competition for feed 
at higher stocking density
| 99
Figure 3.9: Pekin breeder ducks at Central Farms, Trinidad
Figure 3.10A: Common Muscovy strain
100 |
Figure 3.10B: White Muscovy strain used by commercial farmers
Figure 3.11A: Multi-coloured Mule duck Figure 3.11B: White Mule duck 
| 101
Figure 3.12A: Intensive system with deep litter floor
Figure 3.12B: Intensive system with solid dirt floor
102 |
Figure 3.12C: Semi-intensive system (Guyana) 
Figure 3.12D: Semi-intensive system (Trinidad)
| 103
Figure 3.13: Integrated duck production system with fish, Sugarcane Feeds 
Centre, Trinidad
Figure 3.14: Back yard subsistence production system in Trinidad
104 |
Figure 3.15:  Examples of brooding facilities used in Trinidad 
| 105
 Figure 3.16:  Duck processing at Central Farms, Trinidad 
Figure 3.17:  Whole frozen duck carcasses on sale in a supermarket in 
Trinidad
106 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for 
Vegetable Production
Chaney C.G. St. Martin
INTRODUCTION 
The identification and implementation of technologies and systems with 
the potential to increase agricultural production and productivity, have been 
the main strategies used to maximize the value of the vegetable sub-sector 
of the Caribbean. These strategies are seen as important to satisfy local 
demands for vegetables, decrease vegetable imports, which amounts to an 
average annual expenditure of US$265 Million in the Caribbean (Walters 
and Jones, 2012), and to increase food security. Protected agriculture is 
currently viewed as one such strategy, which can be used to profitably 
produce crops in the region.
Jensen and Malter (1995) define protected agriculture (PA), as the 
modification of the natural environment to achieve optimum plant growth. 
It is viewed as a means of addressing the limitations of traditional open-field 
vegetable production systems, particularly low and inconsistent crop yields 
and productivity. PA employs technologies such as greenhouses (GH), rain 
shelters (RS) and net houses (NH), which primarily differ  based on the type 
of protective material used, the size and complexity of the structure, and the 
degree to which the environment is manipulated or controlled. A greenhouse 
is a framed or inflated structure, covered by a transparent or translucent 
material that permits optimum light transmission for plant production and 
protects against adverse climatic conditions (Jensen and Malter 1995). By 
contrast, a rain shelter is a greenhouse-like unit, in which, only the roof is 
covered with a transparent or translucent material that is impervious to rain. 
It can either have no, or open sidewalls but has no mechanical ventilation or 
heating system. On the other hand, NH are greenhouse-like units, that are 
usually covered with insect proof netting that is pervious to rain.  The net 
house may provide some degree of shading but does not normally consist 
of mechanical ventilation or heating systems. 
C H A P T E R  FOUR
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Regardless of the type of protective structure or the scale of commercial production, 
farmers are required to have a more comprehensive knowledge of agronomic and crop 
management principles than for traditional agriculture (Jensen and Malter 1995).  Moreover, 
the success of any of these PA technologies is very much dependent on the level and quality 
of the applied technology, adequate research, and the provision of efficient technical support 
systems. The success of PA technologies is also dependent on factors such as local climate, 
marketing intelligence, and market access.  
In the Caribbean, such factors have either been limited or inadequately harmonized, 
resulting in several failed attempts at adopting PA technologies as a means of profitably 
producing vegetable crops. Such is the case with the recent re-introduction of greenhouse 
technology where farmers have not been able to achieve or sustain expected production, 
productivity, and profitability. This is mainly due to constraints, which have existed since 
the 1950s across reintroduction cycles of this technology. These include high greenhouse 
temperatures (>35°C) and relative humidity (> 90 percent), pest and disease management 
challenges, ineffective production systems, and plant growth media and nutrient 
management issues (St Martin and Brathwaite 2012a; St Martin et al. 2008). All of which 
often resulted in the abandonment of facilities after a few crop cycles. 
This raises the question of which crop production and/ PA technology is most appropriate 
and sustainable for use under the climatic conditions of the Caribbean. As is evident by the 
numerous structural modifications made to totally enclosed greenhouses by many farmers, 
including  replacing plastic roof or sidewalls coverings with saran netting or 17–25 or lower-
mesh screens and producing in open-sided structures with plastic roof coverings, appropriate 
and sustainable PA technology is being intuitively defined as RS and/or NH. In fact, many 
novice greenhouse farmers are opting to establish, RS or NH instead of fully enclosed-
plastic roof covered GH. RS and NH are increasingly being viewed as more sustainable than 
greenhouse because they require a much lower initial capital investment, temperatures in 
these structures are generally lower than in GH,  and if appropriately managed, yields and 
productivity are arguably higher than in GH or open field production. 
In light of this emerging trend, the objective of this chapter is to provide a comprehensive 
overview of best management practices (BMPs) for sustainable production of vegetables in 
RS and NH. In contrast to the first volume of this book, focus is placed on the production 
of leafy vegetables, mainly lettuce, rather than tomato (St Martin and Brathwaite, 2012b). 
However, owing to similarities among protective structures, some of the principles and 
practices, which are described in detail in the first volume, have either been summarized 
into ‘audit verification checklists’, or not included. This is particularly so, for BMPs relating 
to site selection, RS/NH design and structure, and some cultural practices. These checklists 
provide a quick and practical means of evaluating the implementation of BMPs.  
108 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
The collation of information on recommended practices was done using the same 
methodology described by St Martin and Brathwaite (2012b). This included sourcing 
information from research done under the climatic conditions of the Caribbean, growers’ 
and the author’s experiences/ or on-site research, and RS/NH or GH manuals relevant to 
crop production in tropical and temperate conditions.  All best practices and principles are 
rooted in, or linked to GLOBALG.A.P standards (GLOBALG.A.P 2011) and are addressed 
under the relevant subheadings. ‘Rules of thumb’, which were mainly adopted or modified 
from Talekar, Su, and Lin (2003) were used to highlight and summarize key points in this 
chapter. 
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ACROSS THE REGION
BMPs in this chapter will be related only to structural and cultural practices.  BMPs for 
monitoring environmental factors, disaster preparedness, and business will not be discussed 
in this chapter since they are similar to those for GH production, which were thoroughly 
discussed in the first volume of this book. 
Structural Best Management Practices
These include BMPs relating to site selection, and RS or NH design and structure, which 
directly or indirectly affect crop performance, hence the profitability of the enterprise. Such 
BMPs are however, not adequately considered when establishing RS or NH in the Caribbean. 
Factors that should be considered when selecting a site for the erection of RS or NH are 
summarized in an audit verification checklist presented in Box 4.1. 
    A first step to successful rain shelter or net-house vegetable 
production is a good location. Structures on higher lands are less 
likely to be flooded and have lower temperatures.
RS and NH design and structure 
Many of the rain shelter designs in the Caribbean have been developed “on-farm” by 
growers, mainly through modifications done to totally enclosed GH. As such, designs and 
sizes of RS vary, as do the materials used to construct these structures (Figures 4.1–4 – 
pages 106–7). In contrast, net-house designs are more standard than those for RH, and vary 
mainly with reference to the type and color of netting used, degree of shading provided, 
and the size of the structures.
| 109
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Box 4.1: Audit verification checklist for site selection for establishment of RS/NH 
    
Orientation and light
9	 RS or NH orientation is in any direction that allows for maximum airflow given that neither topography 
nor canopies do not shade the structure during sunrise and set and/or the orientation of RS or NH is 
not limited by plot size.
9	 Vent openings of NH are oriented in the direction that the wind is coming from rather than against it. 
Local climatic conditions, topography and soil quality
9	 Mean daily temperatures are not above 35°C.
9	 RS or NH are located in areas with cooler temperatures, which in the Caribbean, usually occur at 
elevations > 500m above sea level.
9	 RS or NH structures are sited on soil that is well drained, particularly for crops that are to be cultivated 
directly in the soil.
9	 Soil is amended with organic materials such as mature compost as a cost effective strategy for improving 
the drainage and fertility of the soil.
9	 In the case of soil-less production and in low-lying areas, RS or NH is built on elevated earthen pads 
that are at least 0.9 m larger than the structure in all directions, high enough to prevent excess rain 
water from flowing into the structure and  with a gentle slope of 1–2 percent to the exterior to allow 
for good drainage.
9	 Soil-less cultivation systems and the establishment of the structure on a gravel base, 15cm to 30cm 
above grade are used where access to good quality soil is limited or not available.
Water supply and quality
9	 Water needs for RS or NH vegetable production were estimated and evaluated against water supply, 
access, price, and quality in the area, particularly in countries such as Jamaica, Anguilla, Antigua and 
Barbuda, and St. Kitts and Nevis, where the domestic water supply for the cultivation of crops may 
not be readily available year round, or the cost is prohibitive. RS or NH operation requires 8,000 liters 
of water per square meter (196 gallons per square feet) of growing space per year.
9	 Water quality analyses were done and  the analyses consisted of key variables such as pH (6.5–8.5), 
electrical conductivity (250–2000 µS/m), sodium content (20–60 percent), sodium adsorption ratio 
(3–10), E. coli (≤77 CFU/100ml), Enterococci (≤20 CFU/100ml), and faecal coliforms (≤200 CFU/100ml). 
9	 Potable water is used for irrigation, as river and well water are usually less ideal as they may contain 
pathogens and require filtration to remove silt and particulate matter that might clog irrigation systems.
9	 If it is affordable, water used for farming is tested for pesticides, fuel oil, and other contaminants.
Other site selection considerations.
9	 Proximity to markets, access to labor and utilities, potential hazards and/or disasters such as land 
slippage, tall trees, flooding, hurricanes, and industrial pollution have been considered when siting 
RS/NH.
9	 Space for future expansion of the operation as well as the social construct and norms of the 
neighbourhood where the structure will be established have also been considered.
Source: St. Martin and Brathwaite (2012b),  Chandra, Srivastava, and Maheshwari (1982),  
USAID (2008), Mirza (2008), Torres and Lopez (2010), Kumar, Tiwari, and Jha (2009), Chen, 
| Shen, and Li (1982), St Martin et al. (2008) and Dey (2001) 110 
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
With respect to the appropriate PA design structure for vegetable production under the 
climatic conditions of the Caribbean, rain shelter designs with opened sidewalls, definitely 
address to some extent, the issue of high mean daily temperatures (>35°C), which have 
been observed in totally enclosed greenhouse structures. However, this heat problem may 
persist in totally enclosed NH that are completely covered with insect-proof netting (50-
mesh) and have no vent system. Furthermore, over time, the transmission of sunlight is 
also significantly reduced due to the blockage of insect-proof netting by dust particles.
Although temperatures are generally lower in opened-sided nethouse designs, these 
structures provide little or no protection against rains, which may limit vegetable production 
in the wet season. On the other hand, RS are impervious to rains; however do not limit the 
entry of pest and pathogens into the structure. Therefore, a more rigorous and/or demanding 
pest management system, similar to that used in open-field cultivation is needed. However, 
opened-sided RS or NH may limit the need for hand pollination in crops such as tomato, 
which may be high cost and time consuming. The substitution of  lower size mesh netting 
(32-mesh) for insect-proof netting (50-mesh) in totally enclosed NH, may result in lower 
temperatures, while limiting the entry of several insect pests such as aphids and thrips.   
In light of these ‘trade-offs’ between types of protective structures and designs, it is 
recommended that the grower select structures that pose the lowest risk to the production 
of a specific crop and for which he/she has greater managerial strength. For example, in 
areas with high rainfall, and the vegetable crop selected for cultivation has a relatively short 
production cycle (e.g. lettuce) and no or few major pest or diseases, RS are recommended 
for use rather than NH. In contrast, in cooler areas, where rainfall is low to moderate, and 
the vegetable crop selected for cultivation has a relatively longer production cycle (e.g. 
tomato) and is susceptible to major pest or disease infestations, NH are recommended for 
use rather than RS. 
All protective structures, whether RS or NH, should be built to withstand strong winds 
in locations where severe storms occur. As a result, it is recommended that growers use 
galvanized iron pipes to construct the frame of these structures. Steel clips should also be 
used for fastening, where possible. Wood or bamboo should only be used for the construction 
of semi-permanent RS or NH. 
Two critical factors that must be considered when designing totally covered NH are: 
1.  The choice of mesh size of netting, and
2. The design and location of two double doors to the structure
Best-practices relating to these two factors and the issue of proper design and structure 
are detailed in the audit verification checklist provided in Box 4.2. 
| 111
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Box 4.2: Audit verification checklist for proper design and structure of 
NH and RS
9	 NH and RS are constructed at the recommended height of 3.0–4.5 m. Heights of 5.2-5.8 m are 
recommended in low lying areas when high mesh size screens (≥40) are used to completely 
cover the NH or the side walls of the RS.
9	 NH are constructed at the recommended size of 25–35 m long and 12–21 m wide. In low-lying 
areas, with high temperatures, the width of the NH is restricted to 10–12 m.
9	 RS are constructed at the recommended size of 5 m long by 6 m wide for small-scale production 
systems. For large-scale production, RS are built using the recommended sizes for NH.  
9	 A 32-mesh (32 holes per inch or 13 holes per cm or hole size 0.8 mm), which is uniformly weaved, 
durable quality, nylon netting has been selected for covering NH. 
9	 Nettings of lower mesh size (<32) are not used as sidewall coverings because the relatively 
larger mesh openings readily allow the entry of several pests including diamondback moth, 
striped flea beetle, leaf miners, and aphids. 
9	 Finer mesh nets (>32) are used to restrict the entry of smaller sized pests. However, be mindful 
that that finer mesh nets provide greater resistance to air flow. Therefore, temperatures inside 
these NH may rise to levels, which limit crop performance.
9	 Mesh nettings allow a minimum air movement of 3.5–5.4 m3/m2.
9	 A white coloured shade cloth (40 percent) is used for roof covering to allow for proper shading 
and airflow, which will also help to reduce the temperature in the NH.
9	 Two double-doors arranged at right angles to each other are used for entering and exiting the 
NH (Figure 4.5) instead of single door systems, which allows easy entry of insects when opened.
9	 These doors have been erected at the side of the NH, opposite to the direction of the wind 
encountered during most of the year.
9	 Larger double door (Panels 1 and 2 in Figure 4.5) are used only at planting and harvesting to 
move farm equipment in and out of the structure. 
9	 Only one door is opened at a time when entering or leaving.
9	 Doors are securely shut when not in use.
9	 Smaller double door (Panels 3 and 4 in Figure 4.5) are used for entering the structure for daily 
operations.
Source: Kumar, Tiwar and Jha (2009), Smith and Lopes (2010), Mirza (2008), USAID (2008), Willits 
and Peet (2000), Willits (1994), Willits (1993), Kamaruddin, Bailey, and Douglas (2000), St. Martin and 
Brathwaite (2012b) and Palada, Roan and Black (2003)
112 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
Figure 4.5: Diagram of nethouse opening; arrows indicate directions that 
doors (indicated by slanted boxes) slide. 
Source: Palada, Roan and Black (2003)
Construction of RH and NH
In this section, the focus is placed on the construction of a single-bed rain shelter with 
an arched roof (Figures 4.2), which is a simple and affordable design. This structure can be 
made into a net house by using nylon mesh for roof and side-coverings instead of plastic 
covering on the roof alone. The size of this structure can also be increased to accommodate 
more beds by incorporating centre posts and more reinforcements in the design (Figure 
4.3). The following description of the construction of RS was adopted mainly from Palada, 
Roan and Black (2003). 
Components of RH or NH structures
Components of RS or NH structures are classified as:
•  Structural – consisting of pillars, frames, pipes, and side braces (Figure 4.6). 
•  Covering materials – comprising polyethylene film, polyvinyl chloride, polyolefine, 
or nylon netting. 
• Connecting and fastening accessories – consisting of fastening pins, hooks, clips, 
and plastic belts (Figure 4.6). 
| 113
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Establishing the foundation posts
The positions of the two corner posts should be firstly marked out at each end of the 
bed/area (i.e. four-corner posts in total) (Box 4.3 – Step 1A). Holes should be then dug 
and the posts buried at least 30 cm deep (Box 4.3 – Step 1B). For a more permanent and 
secure structure, the grower may opt to dig a hole 15cm wide x 15cm long x 40cm deep, split 
(18–25 cm) then bend end sections of the corner posts and set them in concrete, ensuring 
that the corner posts are at the same height and level (Box 4.3 – Step 1C). The rest of the 
foundation posts should be equally spaced (approximately 70cm apart), starting from the 
corner posts, and buried at least 30 cm deep. 
Connecting posts 
The arch tops are connected to the foot pipes (foundation posts) by inserting both ends at 
5 cm to the pointed end of the foot pipe post (Box 4.3 – Step 2A). Steel clips should be used 
to attach horizontal and diagonal side pipes to the structure to reinforce the sides (Box 4.3 
– Steps 2A, B and D), and the centre top pipe installed into the arch top (Box 4.3 – Step 2C). 
Installing the plastic film cover 
The UV polyethylene film cover should be carefully cut to fit the arched top roof. To 
adequately fit a RS with a single bed measuring 5m long (Figure 4.2), a sheet of polyethylene 
film measuring 5.3 m long x 3.75 m wide is required. Half-inch (1.30 cm) polyethylene plastic 
clips should be used to attach the film covering to the arch and side brace galvanized iron 
pipes (Box 4.3–Step 3). 
Reinforcing the plastic sheets and cover
The plastic covering on the side horizontal pipes and upright post can be reinforced using 
steel clips. Plastic wire belts should be run across the top of the plastic sheet and fastened 
to upright posts to reinforce the covering against strong winds (Box 4.3–Step 4).
Covering the sides
The use of side-coverings is recommended only if there is a major insect pest problem and 
to prevent rain from blowing in. In cases, where white-fly transmitted viruses are problematic, 
and the RS are located at high elevations (>500m above sea level) in a cool environment, 
a 60-mesh nylon netting is recommended as a side covering. At lower elevations, 32-mesh 
nylon netting is recommended. The nylon mesh netting should be cut at least six to eight 
percent longer than the length and height of the side wall to ensure that enough material 
is present for fastening and securing. For example, for the RS in Figure 4.1, two sheets of 
114 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
the nylon netting, each 5.3 m long x 1.8 m high are needed to fit two sides of the structure. 
To cover the front and back ends of rain shelter, sheets of nylon netting measuring at least 
11–13 percent greater than the width and height of the rain shelter structure can be used. 
In the case of Figure 4.1, the nylon netting sheet should measure 2.7 m wide x 2.7 m high. 
Plastic clips should be used to fasten the nylon netting on all sides of the structure (Box 
4.3 – Step 5). The bottom of the netting should be secured by inserting it in the soil to a of 
depth of 10–20 cm, and gently compacting the soil on the netting.
Figure 4.7: Drawing of single-bed rain shelter with an arched roof
Source: Palada, Roan and Black (2003)
| 115
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Cultural Best Management Practices
This section on cultural BMPs will focus on crop and variety selection, nutrient 
requirements, pest, disease, harvest, and post-harvest management. Water management 
and weed control are also categorized under cultural practices. These topics will however 
not be discussed in this chapter because there is little variation in water management and 
weed control principles and practices in tomato production compared with that of lettuce 
under protective structures.1 
Crop and variety selection
The selection of the type of vegetable crops and crop varieties to be cultivated is one of the 
most important decisions to be made in crop production using RS or NH. Market demand 
and prices and cost of production are the primary factors which should be considered when 
selecting leafy vegetables for net-house production. However, growers must also choose 
leafy vegetables and varieties that are high yielding and most appropriate for the production 
system employed. Whenever possible, high quality, hybrid seeds from reputable, seed 
companies, which are bred for greenhouse conditions with heat tolerant characteristics and 
resistance to multiple common diseases e.g. bacterial leaf spots, bottom rot, and crown and 
head rots are desired. Information on disease resistance properties can often be found on 
the label of the seed container. However, growers should be aware that ‘resistance’ labelling 
does not indicate that a crop will be completely immune to a disease and/or pest. Therefore, 
selecting a crop variety with high resistance to diseases is no substitute for a good crop 
rotation system that consists of leafy vegetables from diverse families (i.e. crucifers and 
non-crucifers) Figure 4.8.  
Such a crop rotation system, which is based on the rotation of crucifers such as Chinese 
cabbage and pak-choi with non-crucifers e.g. lettuce and amaranthus, will assist in 
minimizing insect and pest damage, and maximize crop performance. This is particularly 
so for crucifers, where cultivation of these crops season after season in the same substrate 
leads to poor crop growth and low yield due to the accumulation of undesirable crucifer 
root exudates (Talekar, Su and Lin 2003). If market demand requires a farmer to grow 
crucifers continuously, it is suggested that the net-houses be divided into two; one half is 
planted to crucifers and the other to non-crucifers in each crop cycle (Talekar, Su and Lin 
2003). During succeeding crop cycles, the crop should be rotated, and non-crucifers planted 
1. For an extensive discussion on BMPs on water management and weed control, it is recommended that the 
reader consult St. Martin and Brathwaite (2012b).
116 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
over the half of the net-houses that was planted with crucifers in the immediate preceding 
season and vice versa (Talekar, Su and Lin 2003).
Hybrid varieties generally produce stable higher yields with greater uniformity of size, 
compactness, and yield than inbred varieties (Singh, Dasgupta and Tripathi 2005). Varieties 
bred to limit physiological problems such as bolting (or, the shooting of sled stalks occurs) 
and tipburn should also be selected for production in these protected structures. Besides 
the high cost, the major drawback of hybrid seed is that saved seeds will not produce a ‘true 
to type’ plant in the next growing cycle. This means new seeds must be purchased for each 
season, which will most likely increase production costs.  
     Rotate the crop and your plants will 
remain tip-top.
For lettuce production, growers should be familiar with the climatic requirements for 
different lettuce types such as leafy, head, romaine, or specialty types, which may be red or 
red and green. For example, some head type lettuce such as iceberg or crisphead, require 
rather exacting temperatures (10–20°C) to form compact good quality heads (Valenzuela, 
Kratky and Cho 1996).  The formation of heads is limited at 20–27°C. Cool nights are also 
necessary for good quality head type lettuce, as with high night temperatures, lettuce tends 
to become bitter. Tip burning also occurs at high temperatures. For these reasons, head 
type lettuce is recommended for cultivation in NH at high elevations (150 –900m above 
sea level) or in areas with cooler temperatures. In contrast, leafy (Minetto) and semi-head 
(Green Mignonette) lettuce may be grown year-round at lower elevations (Valenzuela, Kratky 
and Cho 1996). Cultivars of lettuce that are commonly grown in the Caribbean include 
Minetto, Mignonette Trini Star, Trinity, and Tropical Emperor. Growers are encouraged 
to continually search for and test new varieties that provide the best possible advantage in 
terms of environmental conditions and profitability of the enterprise.
Growth substrate selection and management2
Table 4.1 provides a summary of the key physical and chemical properties, which must 
be considered when selecting soilless substrates for the production of leafy vegetables. 
Net-house vegetable production is commonly done in soil-less substrates whereas in RS, 
2. Growth substrate selection, handling, disinfecting and managing pH and electrical conductivity have been 
extensively addressed by St. Martin and Brathwaite (2012b).  
| 117
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
production is mainly done in the soil. As it pertains to production in soil, lettuce yield and 
quality tends to be highest in well-drained, slightly acid to neutral soils (pH 5.5–7) with 
high organic matter content. 
Irrespective of the type of substrate used i.e. soil or soilless, key physical and chemical 
properties must be assessed before a final decision on a substrate is made. This is important 
since these properties affect the ability of the growth substrate to effectively perform its 
basic functions.  This not only includes providing the appropriate root environment, plant 
support and supply of nutrients, but also facilitating water delivery to the crop.   A checklist 
of factors that must be considered when selecting plant growth substrates and recommended 
practices for managing growth substrates are provided in Boxes 4.4–4.7.
Table 4.1: Key physical and chemical propertiesi of soilless substrates for the 
production of leafy vegetables
Total Air space Water Available Bulk density pH Electrical 
porosity holding water conductivityii
capacity content
50–80 10–30 45–65 25–35 0.19–0.70g/cm3 5–6.0 0.2–1.5 dS/m
percent percent percent percent
i. Physical and chemical properties of soilless substrate listed in the table are after irrigation and drainage, done on a percent  
volume basis.
ii. For seedling production the ideal electrical conductivity of the substrate is at a lower range of 0.2-0.5 dS/m (Yeager et al., 2007). 
Source: Maronek, Studebaker, and Oberly (1985) 
118 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
Box 4.4: Audit verification checklist for growth substrate selection
9	 Cost effective substrates that are preferably locally available in large quantities, renewable, 
possess good physical, chemical and if possible, disease suppressive properties are selected 
for crop cultivation.
9	 The inherent fertility of soil-less media has not been considered as a primary factor in 
selecting an appropriate substrate for crop growth, since fertilizer management plans 
are designed to supply all the nutrients needed by the crop during the production cycle.
9	 Soils usually do not provide optimal aeration and drainage required to maximize crop 
performance and usually need to be disinfected to prevent the build-up of soil-borne 
disease, insects, and weed seeds. 
9	 In the event where the use of soil-less media is cost prohibitive, soil that has been amended 
with well-matured compost, solarized or steam treated is used for crop cultivation. Raised 
beds have been established for the cultivation of leafy vegetable crops.
9	 Ready mix commercial substrates such as PRO-MIX® are used for seedling production, 
particularly for new vegetable producers.
9	 Growers experiment with compost mixes made from locally available material as possible 
alternatives to peat moss based substrates.
9	 Raw bagasse and sawdust or coconut coir that have not been retted (leached), are not 
used as components of or as substrates as they contain phytotoxic compounds such as 
phenolics and also immobilize nitrogen.
9	 Composted rather than uncomposted coconut coir is used as container substrate for soilless 
cultivation of leafy vegetable crops, particularly by new growers.
9	 Raw or composted coconut coir that has been pre-soaked  and  leached  (retting) over 
48 hours is used for crop cultivation unless the raw material has  disease  suppressive 
properties,  which  may  be  lost  through  this  process.
Source: St Martin and Brathwaite (2012b), Ma and Nichols (2004) and Handreck (1992)
| 119
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Box 4.5: Audit verification checklist for disinfecting growth substrates
9	 Chemical methods are not used for the sterilization of growth substrates since the most effective 
chemicals are highly toxic to humans and animals and have negative effects on the environment. 
9	 Solarization and steam pasteurization are used for sterilizing substrates.
9	 Solarization is used for sterilization, if capital is limited and there is a lag of at least a month or 
two between the end of one crop cycle and the beginning of another.
9	 To increase the efficiency of solarization, two layers of polyethylene, separated by fillers (i.e., 
PVC pipes) spaced every few feet are used to create an air space.
9	 Though faster than solarization, steam pasteurization may be cost prohibitive to producers 
because it requires investment in equipment and materials such as steamers and thermometers.
9	 The steaming process has been done for at least 30 – 45 minutes, during which time the substrate 
has been exposed to steam at approximately 100°C.
9	 Temperature has been monitored during the process to ensure that uniform heating is achieved 
and that all sections reach at least 82°C. 
9	 Substrates have not been over-steamed since this may have killed disease suppressive microbes 
and may cause the release of toxic substances.
9	 Substrates that have had slow-release fertilizer blended into it have not been steam pasteurized.
Source: Sethuraman and Naidu (2008) and Robbins and Evans (2011)
Box 4.6: Audit verification checklist for adjusting pH
9	 Adjustments of the pH of media are made when the values are outside the optimum range 
recommended for the production of leafy vegetable crops.
9	 pH most often needs to be raised rather than lowered.
9	 Calcitic (CaCO3) or dolomitic limestone (mixture of CaCO3 and MgCO3) in the form of fine powder 
or pelletized granules have been incorporated into substrates prior to planting, to increase pH.
9	 Fine powders calcitic or dolomitic limestone, which are faster acting than coarser prills (pellets), 
have been thoroughly mixed with media used, as they tend to settle and leach out of the bottom 
of the pot/container.
9	 The amount of lime required has been determined based on the starting and desired pH, the 
particle size of the limestone (small particles are faster acting than large ones), the type of media 
and the alkalinity of irrigation water used. Lime rate recommendations generally range from 
3 – 9kg/m3 with rates below 4 kg most commonly used.
9	 If plants are in production, growers apply a flowable limestone drench to the substrate at an 
average rate of 1L limestone per 400L of water to raise the pH of the substrate.
9	 For a cost effective way of increasing media pH over a longer period, the grower has switched 
from an acid-based fertilizer (high percentage of nitrogen in the ammoniacal form) to basic 
fertilizers that contain a higher percentage of the nitrogen in the nitrate form.
9	 Materials such as elemental sulphur, ammonium sulphate and ferrous sulphate have been 
incorporated into substrates before planting or applied through irrigation water to lower the pH.
Source: Robbins and Evans (2011) and St. Martin and Brathwaite (2012b) 
120 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
Box 4.7: Audit verification checklist for managing electrical conductivity of 
substrate 
9	 A consistent electrical conductivity value of > 3.0 dS/m before and after the application of 
fertilizer is a cause for serious concern as it may negatively affect crop performance.
9	 To address the problem of high EC, growers  have first determined the source of or practices 
resulting in elevated salt accumulation.  If possible, the grower has reduced or eliminated the 
source of elevated salts, which is usually from irrigation water, the amount or type of fertilizer 
used, or the media.
9	 Manures and compost (immature and mature) usually have high EC levels; therefore they 
may have to be substituted for peat moss at a rate of 20–40 percent by volume for a growth 
substrate mix. 
9	 High EC levels are being managed by keeping the percentage of water that leaves a container 
relative to what is applied (leaching fraction) at 20 to 30 percent and not allowing pots to dry out. 
9	 Substrates are not kept too wet as this may lead to the development of secondary problems 
such root and stem rot. 
Source: Ayers and Westcot (1985), Robbins and Evans (2011), St. Martin and Brathwaite (2012b), USAID 
(2008) and Smith and Lopes (2010)
Land preparation for RS/NH
The grower should prepare the land under the RS/NH by tilling with a tractor or hand 
tiller. It is recommended that the grower construct raised beds of approximately 30 cm 
high and 1.5 m wide and at least 2.4 m long (Palada, Roan and Black 2003). Longer beds, 
extending almost the full length of the RS/NH may be constructed if production is being done 
on well-drained soil. Hand hoes should be used to straighten the beds before applying basal 
fertilizer. The use of silver or black plastic mulch (0.01–0.04 mm thick) is recommended 
as an effective means of weed suppression, retaining soil moisture, moderating soil 
temperature, and deterring some pests.  Plastic mulch should be rolled over the bed and 
the side edges of the plastic secured by throwing soil on both sides of the bed (Figure 4.9). 
Drains approximately 0.45–0.6 m wide between beds and running the length of the RS/
NH should be constructed between raised beds.
Propagation, transplanting, and plant spacing
To assure a uniform and proper stand establishment, it is recommended that most leafy 
vegetable crops including lettuce, should be transplanted rather than direct seeded.  The 
amount of seed required for transplanting lettuce is usually lower than that needed for direct 
seeding.  For example, for head lettuce approximately 85–170g of seeds are required for 
cultivating an acre (210–420g/ha), compared to 454g/acre (1122g/ha) for direct seeding. 
| 121
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
For leafy types, approximately 57–142g/acre (141–351g/ha) is required for transplanting 
compared to 907–1,360g/acre (2240g–3359g/ha) for direct seeding.  Apart from requiring 
less seeds for cultivation, transplanting lettuce also has the advantage of easier weed control, 
less damage due to birds, and higher water, land and fertilizer use efficiency since the plants 
are in the RS/NH production system for a shorter period. 
Growers should be aware that lettuce seeds germinate best at 15–20°C, and will fail to 
germinate at > 27°C, if they are not primed to overcome thermo-dormancy (Valenzuela, 
Kratky and Cho 1996).  Therefore, for year-round cultivation particularly at low elevations, 
growers should purchase primed lettuce seeds from a reputable seed company.  High 
quality seed generally emerges three to five days after sowing. Except when planting, lettuce 
seeds should be refrigerated at all times as they quickly lose viability when exposed to high 
temperatures and humidity. Open-pollinated seed requires a dry storage period prior to 
sowing. 
Slow release starter fertilizers can be incorporated in the substrate before trays or 
containers are uniformly filled with the seedling starter substrate.  If a slow release fertilizer 
was not incorporated in the media, seedlings should be fertigated once at the two true-leaf 
stage with 6 grams of an 8-32-8 homogeneous fertilizer per litre of growing media, plus 
200 ppm of a 13-24-24 plus micronutrients foliar fertilizer applied in the irrigation water. 
Growers may also apply suitable commercial fertilizer at a rate and time as guided by the 
label and other factors such as properties of media and the crop type. Growers should 
ensure that the seedlings are not excessively fertilized, particularly with nitrogen, which 
will result in soft-tissued seedlings.  On the other hand, under fertilization will result in 
nutrient deficient seedlings.
As a general rule, vegetable crop species should be ready to be transplanted at the four 
to five true leaf stage, which usually occurs four to six weeks after sowing.  However, for 
cultivation in raised beds under RS/NH, transplanting of lettuce can be done as early as two 
to four weeks after sowing. For novice growers, it is recommended that head type lettuce 
transplants be spaced at 38–45 cm between rows and 30–38 cm between plants and semi-
head types, 20–30 cm between rows and plants.  For leafy type lettuce, 38–45 cm between 
rows and 25–30 cm between plants should be used.  These spacings usually result in three 
to four rows per bed.  For production in soilless substrates, transplanting can be done 
earlier at one to three weeks after sowing depending on the sturdiness and health of the 
seedlings.  Transplants should be cultivated at a planting density of two seedlings/0.1m2. 
The time from transplanting to harvest ranges from four to seven weeks depending on the 
variety and type of lettuce. Audit verification checklists for propagation, transplanting, and 
spacing practices are presented in Boxes 4.8 and 4.9.  
122 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
 Box 4.8: Audit verification checklist for propagation practices
9	 All propagation is done in an appropriate sheltered structure separate from the RS/NH, where production 
will take place.
9	 For ergonomic reasons and to improve productivity, all propagation is  done on benches and/or tables that 
are at least 1m high with solid netted or meshed surfaces consisting of apertures approximately 2 to 3 cm2.
9	 All tools, supplies including new seedling  trays  as  well  as  the  propagation  area  have been disinfected 
following  the instructions on the label of a suitable sanitizer, such as bleach.
9	 A contingency 3–10 percent has been factored into the equation when calculating the number of seeds 
needed per area. This is done to allocate for losses due to pest and diseases. 
9	 Seeds have been placed in the centre of the cell containing growth media, and lightly covered with the 
substrate.
9	 Seeds have been sown at a depth of approximately 2.5 times the average length of the seed. 
9	 Seedlings have been very gently watered until water drops are seen coming from the holes in the bottom 
of the germination tray.
9	 Germination trays have been wrapped completely with a black plastic (germination chamber) and placed 
in a cool area.
9	 Seedlings have been regularly monitored (at least 3 times/ day) to avoid etiolation. 
9	 Germination trays were unwrapped as soon as the first seed germinates. 
9	 Seedlings were kept in an area with optimum conditions (11–16 klx and a temperature of 24–29˚C).
Source:  St Martin and Brathwaite (2012b), USAID (2008), Smith and Lopes (2010) and Valenzuela, Kratky 
and Cho. (1996) 
Box 4.9: Audit verification checklist for transplanting and plant spacing in a 
containerized-production system
9	 Preparations for transplanting started at least 12 hours before seedlings are removed from seedling trays.
9	 Irrigation systems were made operational and plant containers appropriately arranged, spaced, and filled 
with growth substrate.
9	 Growth substrates were pre-moistened before receiving transplants.
9	 Seedlings were transplanted in the late afternoon when it is not very hot (24-29°C) so that they can adjust 
to temperature and substrates changes overnight.
9	 Growth substrates were firmly pressed around the root of the transplant, and then lightly irrigated after 
transplanting.
9	 Since light is generally not a limiting factor to vegetable production in RS/NH in the Caribbean, selection 
of plant density was primarily based on the potential effect on ventilation rates on crop performance and 
the resources available to produce the crop.
9	 The experienced growers has decided to adhere to, or further adjust transplant spacing to the production 
systems and planned economic goals.
9	 Caution was taken to avoid overcrowding as it will result in decreased yield per plant and also tends 
to promote disease development due to high relative humidity and the inability of pesticides to easily 
penetrate the thick foliage.
Source: St Martin and Brathwaite (2012b) USAID (2008) and Hanson et al.(2000) 
| 123
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
   Plant uniformity starts in the 
germination tray.
Nutrient management
To effectively employ BMPs for nutrient management, growers must be knowledgeable 
about the nutrient requirements and growth pattern of the crop cultivated.  A good starting 
point is to obtain information on the amount of nutrients that a crop removes from a growth 
medium (Table 4.2).  Such information can be used to estimate crop nutrient requirements, 
and develop an appropriate fertilizer programme (St Martin and Brathwaite 2012b).  The 
focus of this integrated nutrient management programme will be to: 
• match fertilizer application with the nutrient requirements of the plant across 
growth stages; 
•  limit the loss of nutrients from plant containers to rain shelter or net-house floors 
during top-watering or from the soil; and 
• limit nutrient and water loss from irrigation and leaching by containing the effluent. 
Table 4.2. Recommended nutrient ranges for lettuce 
Nutrient Range Target level
N 2.5–4.0% 3.5%
P 0.4–0.6% 0.45%
K 4.0–7.5% 5%
Ca 0.9–2.0% 1.0%
Mg 0.3–0.7% 0.35%
S 0.1–0.3% 0.1%
Fe 50–150 ppm 130 ppm
Zn 25–50 ppm 40 ppm
Mn 30–55 ppm 50 ppm
Cu 5–10 ppm 8 ppm
B 15–30 ppm 20 ppm
Mo 0.1–2.0 ppm 0.6 ppm
  Source: Valenzuela, Kratky and Cho (1996) and A & L Canada Laboratories (2006)
124 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
The fertilizer programme developed should take into account: fertiliser type, application 
method, fertilization rate and frequency, volume of fertiliser solution, leaching fraction, 
plant growth rate, and environmental conditions.  An audit verification checklist for nutrient 
management is presented in Box 4.10.
Box 4.10: Audit verification checklist for nutrient management
9	 Tissue and soil analyses were used to help determine the amount of fertilizer to apply to complement 
the nutrient levels already available in the soil or soilless substrates. 
9	 Integrated nutrient management, which focuses on optimising and harnessing the full potential of 
available biological and organic sources and using chemical fertilizers only to supplement the gap 
in the nutrient requirements of the production system, was included in the production of the crop.
9	 Recommendations from soil scientists or technicians on appropriate fertilizers to be used in the 
production of vegetable crops are followed.
9	 At least two different fertilizer sources were used to supply each nutrient.
9	 Ammonium nitrate was used in crop production because a large amount of N is normally recovered 
by plants with slight to moderate amount of leaching.
9	 No more than 50 percent of the total nitrogen supplied to plants grown in soilless media was in the 
ammonium form. 
9	 Vegetable crops were not excessively fertilized i.e. application beyond crop needs, as this can result 
in soluble salt build-up, phytotoxic effects on plant growth, groundwater contamination, and capital 
losses due to purchase of unneeded fertilizer.
9	 Fertilizer programmes consisted of a combination of fertilizer application types including pre-plant, 
foliar and fertigation.
9	 Solid organic materials such as compost were incorporated at the pre-plant stage.
9	 Fertigation was used during all stages of plant growth.
9	 Fertilisers were mixed using an injector system, with an adjustable rate injector designed to inject 
calcium nitrate.  
9	 With the adjustable rate injector, the same fertiliser concentrate was applied at different 
concentrations.
9	 Long periods of fertigation were avoided.  Instead, pulse irrigation (brief periods of fertigation), which 
has been shown to be the best for efficient application of water and nutrients, was used.
9	 The effectiveness of fertilizer programmes on crops and their impact on the environment was 
monitored through water, substrate, and tissue analysis as well as by the observations of the growers.
Source: St Martin and Brathwaite (2012b) USAID (2008), Smith and Lopes (2010), Valenzuela , Kratky and 
Cho  (1998), Talekar, Su, and Lin (2003) and Cox (1985)
| 125
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Growers should pay particular attention to phosphorus availability since it has been 
shown to account for the single largest variation in lettuce yield production among various 
substrate types (Valenzuela, Kratky and Cho 2003).  Moreover, substrates deficient in 
phosphorus may result in increased bacterial infection rates in lettuce, and in some cases, 
harvest delays by several weeks compared to well fertilized plants (Valenzuela, Kratky and 
Cho 1996).  The only symptom of a P deficiency in lettuce is stunted growth, and not the 
reddish pigmentation and leaf ‘feathering’, which are characteristic of phosphorus deficiency 
in other vegetables crops. 
Growers should also ensure that adequate levels of nitrogen are available in the substrate 
for plant uptake since nitrogen levels are associated with the formation of solid heads, as 
well as size, colour and earliness of maturity in lettuce (Valenzuela, Kratky and Cho 1996). 
Nitrogen deficiency in lettuce appears lighter green and often results in delayed harvest 
and/or in failure of heads to achieve marketable size and quality.  Growers should be aware 
that while corrective nitrogen applications are effective during the early vegetative stages 
of the crop, they often result in a 3–10 days delayed harvest (Valenzuela, Kratky and Cho 
1996).  However, corrective nitrogen applications made during the head-formation stage 
will not result in increased head size or final yields.
Pest and disease management
The recommended approach for pest and disease management is the formulation of an 
integrated pest management (IPM) programme, which includes crop, pest and disease 
identification and monitoring, the use of resistant cultivars, sanitation, and appropriate 
cultural, chemical and biological control strategies (Smith and Lopes 2010; St Martin and 
Brathwaite 2012b). A summary of the key points for the respective components of this 
programme is presented in Boxes 4.11–13 and the key disorders  and diseases of lettuce in 
the Caribbean are discussed. Important pests of lettuce include caterpillars, aphids, leaf 
miners, leafhoppers, mites, thrips, and whiteflies.  These pests can be successfully managed 
using most of the strategies and protocols described for disease control in Boxes 4.11–13. 
126 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
Box 4.11: Audit verification checklist for pest and disease identification and 
monitoring 
9	 Information on the major diseases that affect the crop, particularly in the area where the RS/ NH 
are established, was obtained before cultivating the crop.
9	 The assistance of suitably trained personnel to help design and implement an effective IPM 
programme was solicited. 
9	 The IPM programme consists of a monitoring or scouting plan, which should form the basis of IPM 
decision making, regardless of the control strategies used.
9	 A scouting plan consists of a pre-crop site evaluation, inspection of incoming plants, the use of 
sticky cards and indicator plants.
9	 The pre-crop site evaluation was done at least 4-6 weeks prior to the introduction of a new crop or 
at the beginning of another cropping cycle.
9	 An evaluation of the surroundings of the RS or NH extending at least 8 m from the structure, was 
done by collecting information such as, types of weeds, crops growing in the field, soil type and 
drainage problems and methods used to control pests. 
9	  One-third to all the plants were thoroughly examined for signs of insect and disease before being 
introduced into the RS or NH, or not more than 48 hours after they have been introduced into the 
RS/NH.
9	 This examination was done before the plants were transfered to the main growing space in the RS 
or NH, or in a separate receiving shelter.
9	 Once the crop has been established, numbered yellow sticky cards were spaced equally throughout 
the RS or NH in a grid pattern at the minimum recommended rate of 90 m2.  These cards are used 
to monitor infestations of adult flying insects.
9	 The cards were also placed near all entryways and vents. They were replaced weekly unless the 
level of infestation is so high as to demand an earlier removal.
9	 Threshold levels for particular crops are being developed with the assistance of suitably trained 
personnel, using data collected from these cards, such as  the number and type of pest and beneficial 
insects.
9	 A scouting unit is not > 370m2. Large RS or NH can be divided into several scouting units of ≤ 370m2.
9	 Diseases are being monitored using similar inspection systems, record keeping and a selected 
decision-making process. 
9	 Every attempt has been made to accurately identify diseases so that appropriate treatment or action 
can be taken. This has been done using diagnostic laboratory services or specialized consultancy 
services.
Source:  St Martin and Brathwaite (2012b), Smith and Lopes (2010).
| 127
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Box 4.12: Audit verification checklist for sanitation, resistant cultivars and 
environment
Sanitation:
9	 Plant debris, weeds, benches, and troughs were cleared before introducing another crop in the RS  
or NH. 
9	 Tools, plant containers, and shelves were washed and disinfected. 
9	 Recontamination was avoided as much as possible after sanitizing the NH or RS.
9	 Antechambers are being used to help control insect pest entry into NH through the door.
9	 A footbath is located in the antechambers and filled with a commercial surface disinfectant or a ten 
percent chlorine bleach solution (enough to cover the entire sole of a shoe). A washing station was 
established inside the NH for workers who will be in direct contact with plants and supplies. 
9	 Hose nozzles are not kept on the floor of RS or NH, as these are potential sources of recontamination. 
Appropriate hooks are provided for hanging hoses. 
9	 Cleaning and propagating work was done in individual planting blocks or sections and hands and 
tools cleaned and disinfected, or gloves changed between planting blocks or sections.
9	 The reuse of the same growth substrate across crop cycles was avoided as much as possible even if 
disinfection of growth substrate is practiced.
Resistant cultivars:
9	 Varieties resistant to multiple common diseases of the crop have been used, where possible.
Environment:
9	 The focus has been placed on lowering relative humidity and minimizing temperature differentials 
and cold spots in RS and NH. 
Source: Valenzuela, Kratky and Cho (1996), St Martin and Brathwaite (2008) and Smith and Lopes (2010)
Physiological and physical disorders 
Brown stain
Brown stain is caused by excess carbon dioxide (>2.5 percent) in storage.  Some cultivars 
seem to be more susceptible than others.  Symptoms include superficial brown spots on the 
midrib or the surface near the lower part of the midrib, which enlarge and coalesce over the 
leaf as the disorder progresses.  The incidence and severity of brown stain is significantly 
reduced by storing lettuce in low CO2 (< 5 percent) and O2 (<1 percent) environments 
(Valenzuela, Kratky and Cho 1996).
128 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
Box 4.13: Audit verification checklist for cultural and chemical practices
 
Cultural practices:
9	 Crop barriers and trap crops such as corn outside the RS or NH are established. 
9	 Repellent or companion crops such as marigold, chive, and rosemary are established in and around 
the RS or NH. 
9	 Well-drained substrates are used to prevent root diseases.
9	 Appropriate plant spacing is used to allow for good air movement, lower humidity levels, and better 
pesticide coverage.
9	  Irrigation is appropriately done to prevent puddling or excess water on the floor.
9	 Irrigation is done early in the day to allow foliage to remain dry overnight.
Chemical practices:
9	 Chemical pesticides are used as the last resort for the control of pests.
9	 ‘Green chemicals’ such as bio-pesticides and bio-fungicides are used in RS or NH, on a disease 
preventive basis. 
9	 Fungicides are only applied on a preventive basis to valuable crops when conditions are favorable 
for the development of a prevalent disease.
9	 A broad-spectrum fungicide is used on a preventive basis to control root diseases.
9	 For foliar diseases, pesticides are applied when the disease is first evident. 
9	 For effective foliar disease control, foliage is thoroughly covered with pesticide.
9	 To prevent or minimize the development of resistance by the pest, pesticides with different modes 
of action, chemical groups e.g., systemic/contact fungicides are used.
9	 All Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) related to pesticide use, handling, storage, and disposal are 
employed when dealing with chemical pesticides.
9	 Copper-based pesticides approved for use in RS/NH are used to control bacteria and most fungi. 
9	 Diseased plants are removed or isolated from healthy plants.
9	 Viral diseases are controlled by controlling the insect vector, removing the diseased plants from the 
RS/NH and burning them, eradicating host plants such as weeds, and starting with virus-free seeds 
or propagating materials. There are no effective chemicals for the control of plant viral diseases.
9	 Sterile growth substrate is used to prevent nematode problems.
9	 Botanicals such as neem-based products are used as a chemical strategy for nematode control.
9	 Growth substrates containing nematodes are not used for another cropping cycle.
Source: Valenzuela, Kratky and Cho  (1996), St Martin and Brathwaite (2012b) and Smith and Lopes (2010)
| 129
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Russet spotting 
Symptoms of russet spotting include small olive brown spots on the lower midribs of the 
outer leaves. The symptoms develop at least four days after exposure to excessive ethylene 
levels of 20-35 ppm at 2–15˚C, and are visible on both sides of the leaf (Valenzuela, Kratky 
and Cho 1996).  However, the inner leaf side is mostly affected and symptoms tend to be 
more severe on over-matured lettuce or lettuce produced in hot, dry areas. To reduce russet 
spotting, growers should maintain storage temperatures just above freezing, and ventilate 
properly.  Harvested lettuce should also be kept away or separated from climacteric fruits 
e.g. bananas and pineapples, and other sources of ethylene or ethylene derivatives such as 
gasoline engines.
Premature bolting 
When exposed to high temperatures and dry conditions lettuce tends to bolt or flower. 
Cultivars vary in their tendency to bolt. Therefore, premature bolting can be managed by 
selecting a variety that has a low tendency to bolt, cultivating lettuce in areas with cooler 
temperatures, and by the use of best practices for water management. 
Tipburn 
Initial symptoms include small translucent spots close to the leaf margins, which 
eventually result in darken lesions and death of leaf margin tissues.  These spots and lesions, 
which arise due to localized calcium deficiency in the foliage, provide openings for secondary 
bacterial pathogens. Tipburn, which can be controlled to some extent by planting tolerant 
cultivars, is particularly severe under hot weather and fast growing conditions.  Increasing 
soil calcium supply prior to planting, liming highly acid soils, foliar calcium sprays on leafy-
types, slowing growth through lighter fertilizer application (particularly N), keeping  the soil 
sufficiently moist, and shading with up to 35 percent shade cloth, are some strategies that 
can be used to manage tipburn (Koike and Davis 2014; Valenzuela, Kratky and Cho 1996). 
For best results, growers should use a combination of these strategies and not rely only on 
one practice.  The use of calcium sprays alone is often ineffective, especially on head lettuce, 
because calcium is inefficiently translocated to those leaf tissues deficient in calcium (Koike 
and Davis 2014).  Head types are generally more susceptible to tipburn than leafy lettuce. 
Diseases
Bottom rot 
Bottom rot is a fungal disease caused by Rhizoctonia solani.  Early symptoms include 
slimy rotting of the lower leaves in contact with the soil and rust-coloured, sunken spots 
130 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
on petioles and mid-ribs (Koike and Davis 2014).  Eventually, the lesions expand, spread, 
become darker, and result in decay of the entire plant (Koike and Davis 2014).  Control is 
difficult.  However, it is recommended that the grower do the following, as suggested by 
Koike and Davis (2014): 
1.  Keep the foliage dry and the fertilizer level low so that foliage growth is not overly 
succulent.
2.  Plant on raised beds to improve drainage as bottom rot is more severe under moist 
and warm conditions.  
3.  Avoid flooding as a means of controlling the disease.  
4.  Rotate crops.  
5.  Direct fungicide applications towards the base of the plants.  
6. Avoid disturbing the soil after application of protectant fungicides for bottom rot 
management. 
Bacterial leaf spot
Bacterial leaf spot is caused by Xanthomonas campestris pv. Vitians, a bacterium, which 
is highly dependent on wet, cool conditions for infection and disease development (Koike 
and Davis 2014).  Early symptoms of bacterial leaf spot are small, water-soaked leaf spots 
on the older leaves of the plant (Koike and Davis 2014).  These lesions, which are typically 
bordered by leaf veins and angular in shape, quickly turn black.  This is a diagnostic character 
of the disease. To manage the disease, it is recommended that the grower do the following: 
1. Use pathogen-free seed. 
2. Avoid using sprinkler irrigation, whenever possible. 
3. Practise crop rotation. 
4. Destroy alternate hosts such as weeds.  
5. Use can be made of copper-based bactericides, but these are not very effective, and 
should be applied before infection occurs.  Spreader-stickers should be used with 
bactericide treatment, particularly during rainy weather. 
Downy mildew
This fungal disease is caused by Bremia lactucae, a complex organism consisting of 
multiple races (Koike and Davis 2014), which require damp, cool conditions and moisture 
on leaves to infect lettuce. Symptoms include light green to yellow angular spots on the 
upper surfaces of leaves, with white fluffy growth of the pathogen on the lower sides of these 
| 131
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
spots.  Lesions eventually turn brown and dry up (Koike and Davis 2014).  The pathogen can 
become systemic and cause dark discoloration of stem tissue.  The grower should manage 
the disease by using resistant cultivars with fungicide (applied before the development of 
the disease), crop rotation, and sanitation. 
Pink Rib 
This bacterial disease, which is caused by Pseudomonas marginalis, usually occurs on 
over-mature heads, causes a diffused but distinct pink area at the midrib base (Koike and 
Davis 2014).  The symptoms intensify during shipping and storage extending toward the 
leaf veins (Koike and Davis 2014).  Growers can manage this disease by not harvesting and 
packaging over-matured lettuce, good sanitation practices, crop rotation, and providing 
optimal storage conditions. 
Harvest and Post-harvest
Harvest time and maturity and quality indices
Harvest time for lettuce, which usually occurs four to seven weeks after transplanting, 
should be informed by consumer preferences, distance, and time needed to market the 
produce. Maturity is often judged according to the number and colour of leaves and/or 
by head development in semi-head and head type lettuce.  For example, lettuce heads 
with <30 leaves before trimming are considered immature, whereas mature heads have 
approximately 35 leaves (Valenzuela, Kratky and Cho  1996).  Nonetheless, both immature 
and mature lettuce generally have a better flavour and fewer post-harvest problems than 
over-mature heads, which tend to be bitter.  Head-type lettuce with a very loose or easily 
compressible head is generally considered immature, whereas over-mature lettuce have 
very firm or hard heads (Kader, Lipton and Morris 1973). What is critical however, is that 
the grower should harvest the lettuce before the heads bolt, crack, yellow, or turn bitter. 
With improved cultivars and cultural practices, uniformity of the crop yields and quality 
have increased, therefore growers can harvest up to 90 percent of their crop in one harvest. 
In most cases, this has resulted in > 5 harvests per year, with an average yield of 3 kg/m2/
crop (300 grams/sq. ft. crop). 
Lettuce should be harvested when leaves are bright to dark green, crisp and turgid and 
free from insects and decay, as consumers often perceive higher nutrient content and 
overall better quality in such leaves.  Lettuce without discoloration at the butt and signs 
of mechanical damage are also perceived as fresh and safer to eat by consumers (Kader, 
Lipton and Morris 1973). 
132 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
Harvesting operation
In non-containerized-soil production systems, growers should cut the lettuce at soil 
surface, with a sharp, sterilized knife, leaving the roots in the soil.  This minimises the 
removal and transportation of soil to unintended areas, which in turn significantly reduces 
the risk of spreading pathogens or pests to other fields.  However, the land should be cleared 
of all plant debris immediately after harvest.  This will reduce carryover of pests and diseases 
to subsequent crops.
In containerized- soil-less production systems, lettuce should not be cut at the surface 
of the soil-less substrate since it is may be difficult and require additional labor and costs 
to remove or clear roots and other plant debris from each container. The root system can 
be cut off some time after the entire planted is uprooted from the substrate, usually before 
washing or cooling the lettuce.
For head-type lettuce, the heads should be harvested leaving as many of the wrapper 
leaves uninjured as possible. That is, at least four to five wrapper leaves on each head of 
lettuce. To minimize wrapper leaf damage, lettuce should not be cut when the heads are 
wet.  Before packing or immersing in water for cooling, growers should remove soiled and 
spoiled leaves at the base of the lettuce head.  All lettuce heads showing traces of disease 
infection or any other disorder should be discarded. 
Handling and storage practices
Lettuce is a perishable commodity, has a high respiration rate, is sensitive to ethylene, 
and is readily susceptible to damage due to wilting because of its high surface to volume 
ratio.  Therefore, the key guidelines in maintaining post-harvest crop quality are: 
1. avoid mechanical injury such as those resulting from impact, puncture, compression, 
vibration, and abrasion;  
2. promptly and thoroughly cool lettuce;  
3. maintain the optimum storage temperature (0°C to 2°C) and relative humidity 
(95– 100 percent) for lettuce; and 
4. avoid water loss. 
Vacuum cooling is the recommended method for promptly cooling lettuce.  However, 
in the Caribbean, where small-scale production vegetable systems are predominant, cold 
water (4–12°C) can be useful in pre-cooling lettuce. As such, in rain shelter or net-house 
systems, containers with potable cold water can be brought directly into the RS or NH and 
used by the harvester as a field container.  Alternatively, large containers with potable cold 
| 133
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
water can be strategically located in RS and NH, at points which minimise the time between 
harvest and pre-cooling (preferably <20 minutes).  The harvester should use clean water 
with each harvest of lettuce.  Lettuce should be packed in stackable containers, which allow 
for maximum air circulation around pre-cooled lettuce, and reduce mechanical injury.
At the recommended temperature of 0–2°C and relative humidity storage conditions 
of 95-100 percent, leaf type lettuce has an expected storage life of one to two weeks, and 
head-type lettuce two to three weeks.  Harvesters and packers should avoid storing lettuce 
next to climacteric crops and in low CO2 (< 5 percent) and O2 (<1 percent).  Under such 
conditions, lettuce tends to develop off-flavours and various disorders, including russet 
spotting and brown stain. An audit verification checklist for harvest and post-harvest is 
provided in Box 4.14. 
      Keeping the product cool is the most 
important rule.
Post-harvest care of structure
Maintenance of RS or NH 
The grower should disassemble and safely store the components of rainshelter or net-
house structures if they will not be used for an extended period (> 6 months). Plastic roof 
and side netting coverings should be washed with a detergent solution, using a high-pressure 
hose to remove dust, insect eggs, and algae. If compatible with the detergent solution, 
bleach should be added to the detergent solution, to kill algae. Cleaning the plastic roof 
and side netting will increase the transmission of sunlight in the rainshelter and net-house 
structures. Growers should clean the net from the inside-outside direction, as this will reduce 
accumulation of water inside the NH and facilitate the planting of crops without delay. The 
grower should promptly repair any damaged parts of the structure.
     Top profits are seen when rain shelters and 
net-houses are kept clean 
134 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
Box 4.14: Audit verification checklist for harvest and post-harvest
Before harvest:
9	 Good agricultural practices (including sterilizing harvesting tools) are employed to ensure the highest 
acceptable food safety and quality standards.
9	 Harvesters have cut sharp and long fingernails, as these may damage produce.
At harvest: 
9	 Produce was harvested in the early morning or late afternoon, during cool temperatures, and when 
transpiration rate is low.
9	 Utmost care was taken not to cause injury to the produce or to mix damaged and undamaged 
produce. 
On the way to packing shed/area:
9	 Produce is shaded to prevent sunburn and overheating. 
9	 Bumpy drives avoided.
In packing shed and packaging:
9	 Produce was washed with potable water, placed in stackable crates or containers, and moved to 
a shaded cool place where the temperature is < 25°C and humidity is 85–90 percent.The use of 
packages that reduce air movement or exchange to the extent that the quality of the produce 
quickly deteriorates even under optimal storage conditions is avoided.
9	 Produce is covered with an appropriate material such as tarpaulin to prevent water loss.
9	 Stacking crates or containers have been packed to immobilize, cushion, and avoid impacts.
9	  Packing containers such as boxes and crates are not over- or under-filled.
9	 The package, not the produce, bears the stacking load.
Storage life: 
9	 The shelf life of most produce is extended by storing at 10 –15°C and a 95 percent relative humidity.
9	 For most produce, chilling injury occurs below 7°C.
9	 Most storage diseases such as rots are significantly reduced by quick cooling of harvested produce 
and by avoiding fruit injury during harvesting.
Source: Kitinoja and Kader (1994) and St Martin and Brathwaite (2012b)
SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS
As it relates to PA technologies, RS and NH are increasingly being viewed as more 
appropriate and sustainable than fully enclosed GH, for vegetable production under the 
climatic conditions of the Caribbean. This is so, mainly because:
1. The establishment of RS or NH requires a significantly lower initial capital 
investment.
| 135
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
2. To some extent, RS or NH addresses the major factor that limits crop performance 
in totally enclosed GH, i.e. high mean daily temperatures (>35°C). 
3. The level of knowledge and skills required for agronomic, crop, environmental and 
technological management in totally enclosed GH, is arguably higher than what is 
required for operating RS and NH.  
In an effort to avoid the technical pitfalls at adopting rain shelter or net-house technologies 
in the Caribbean, therefore, the following key summary points are presented: 
1. Avoid locating RS and NH on flood prone land or areas that are below or near sea 
level (<100 m above sea level). 
2. There are ‘trade-offs’ between the types of protective structures and designs 
utilized, therefore growers should select structures that pose the lowest risk to the 
production of a specific crop and for which he/she has greater managerial strength.
3. All protective structures, whether RS or NH, should be built to withstand strong 
wind in locations where severe storms and environmental conditions occur.
4. When selecting crops for production in RS or NH consider market demand, prices, 
and cost of production.
5. Net-house designs should include two double doors systems as a means of restricting 
the entry of pest and diseases into the NH. This is an important preventive strategy 
in pest and disease management in NH.
6. Use should be made of an integrated nutrient and pest and disease management 
systems in crop production. 
7. Avoid continuously cultivating the same crop in the same substrate or area of land. 
Use a crop rotation system in the RS and NH.
8. Identify and monitor pest and diseases.
9. Reduce post-harvest damage by harvesting the crop at the appropriate maturity 
index, cooling produce promptly and thoroughly, and storing it under the 
recommended conditions.
10. Keep proper and accurate records.
136 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
REFERENCES
A & L Canada Laboratories. 2006. Molybdenum Ranges in Soils and Tissue. Ontario, 
Canada: A & L Canada Laboratories, Inc.
Ayers, R.S., and D.W. Westcot. 1985. Water Quality for Agriculture. Rome, Italy: Food and 
Agriculutre Orgnisation of the United Nations. 
Chandler,C., and M.L.O. Pulehuiki. 2012. Tomato Shelter.   http://www.pvcplans.com/
hishelter.htm. Accessed February 13, 2014. 
Chandra, P., P.C. Srivastava and R.C. Maheshwari. 1982. Solar Greenhouse Design 
Consideration. Paper presented at the ISAE XIX Annual Convention, Udaipur, 
Rajasthan, India.
Chen, H.H., Z.Y. Shen and P.H. Li. 1982. Adaptability of Crop Plants to High Temperature 
Stress. Crop Science 22, no. 4:719–24. 
Cox, D.A. 1985. Nitrogen Recovery by Seed Geranium as Influenced by Nitrogen Source. 
HortScience 20, no. 5:923–25. 
Dey, D. 2001. Commercial Greenhouse Vegetable Production: Measuring Daily Light 
Integral in a Greenhouse. Alberta, Canada: Government of Alberta, Agriculture and 
Rural Development.
GLOBALG.A.P. 2011. GLOBALG.A.P. http://www.globalgap.org/cms/front_content.
php?idcat=9. Accessed  February 13, 2014. 
Handreck, K.A. 1992. Rapid Assessment of the Rate of Nitrogen Immobilisation in Organic 
Components of Potting Media: II. Nitrogen Drawdown Index and Plant Growth. 
Communications in Soil Science & Plant Analysis, 23 (3-4), 217-230. 
Hanson, P., Chen, J.T., Kuo, C.G., Morris, R. and Opeña, R.T. 2000. Suggested Cultural 
Practices for Tomato. International Cooperators’ Guide, no.00-508.  Taiwan: AVRDC.
Morris. 2012. POL-SABINA Rain Shelter. https://sig.ias.edu/content/pol-sabina-rain-
shelter-mimosa-malawi-2012. Accecssed February 15, 2014.
Jensen, M.H., and A.J.  Malter. 1995. Protected Agriculture: A Global Review. Washington, 
DC: World Bank.
Kader, A.A.,  W.J. Lipton and L.L. Morris. 1973. Systems for Scoring Quality of Harvested 
Lettuce. HortSci 8, no. 5:408–409. 
Kamaruddin, R., B. J. Bailey and M.P. Douglas. (2000). Physical Properties of Covering 
Materials for Naturally Ventilated Tropical Greenhouse. Journal of Tropical Agriculture 
and Food Science 28:55–70. 
Kitinoja, L., and A.A. Kader. 1994. Small-scale Postharvest Handling Practices: A Manual 
for Horticultural Crops 8. CA, USA: Dept. of Pomology, University of California.
| 137
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Koike, S.T. 2010. Systemic Downy Mildew Occurring in Lettuce. http://ucanr.edu/blogs/
blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=2735. Accessed February 15, 2014
Koike, S.T., and R.M. Davis. 2014. UC IPM Pest Management Guidelines: Lettuce. CA, 
USA: University of California.
Kumar, K.S., K.N. Tiwar and M.K. Jha. 2009. Design and Technology for Greenhouse 
Cooling in Tropical and Subtropical Regions: A Review. Energy and Buildings 41, no. 
12:1269–1275. 
Ma, Y.B., and D.G. Nichols. 2004. Phytotoxicity and Detoxification of Fresh Coir Dust and 
Coconut Shell. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 35, no. 1–2:205–218. 
Maronek, D.M., D. Studebaker and B. Oberly. 1985. Improving Media Aeration in Liner 
and Container Production. Proc. Intl. Plant Prop. Soc. 35:591–97
Mirza, M. 2008. Evaluation of Greenhouse Technology in Crop Production in Selected 
Caribbean Development Bank Borrowing Member Countries. St Michael, Barbados: 
Caribbean Development Bank
Palada, M.C.,  Y.C. Roan and L.L. Black. 2003. Rain Shelters for Tomato Production in the 
Hot-Wet Season. International Cooperators’ Guide. Taiwan: AVRDC World Vegetable 
Center. 
Robbins, J.A., and M.R. Evans. 2011. Growing Media for Container Production in a 
Greenhouse or Nursery, Part II (Physical and Chemical Properties). Arkansas: 
Cooperative Extension Service, University of Arkansas/US Dept. of Agriculture and 
County Governments co-operating.
Sethuraman, G., and S. Naidu. 2008. International Encyclopaedia of Agricultural Science 
and Technology. 6th ed. New Delhi, India: Mittal publishers.
Singh, P.K., S.K. Dasgupta and S.K. Tripathi. 2005. Hybrid Vegetable Development. Boca 
Raton, Florida: CRC.
Smith, R.S. and Koike, S.T. 2010. Disorders and Defects in Head Lettuce. http://ucanr.edu/
blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=2583. Accessed February 15, 2014 
Smith, T., and P. Lopes. 2010. Massachusetts Greenhouse Industry Best Management 
Practices Guide. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Amherst.
St Martin, C.C.G., and R.A.I. Brathwaite. 2012a. Compost and Compost Tea: Principles 
and Prospects as Substrates and Soil-Borne Disease Management Strategies in Soil-
Less Vegetable Production. Biological Agriculture & Horticulture 28, no. 1:1–33. doi: 
10.1080/01448765.2012.671516.
———. 2012b. Greenhouse Vegetable Production: Industry, Systems and Practices. In 
Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean, ed. W. Ganpat and W.A.P. 
Isaac,78–128. Kingston, Jamaica: Ian Randle Publishers Ltd.
138 |
Rain Shelters and Net-houses for Vegetable Production 
St Martin, C.C.G., S. Bedasie, W.G. Ganpat, S. Orrigio, W.A.P., Isaac, and R.A.I. Brathwaite. 
2008. Greenhouse Technology is Once Again Washing the Caribbean: Can We Ride 
the Wave this Time Around? Paper presented at the International Congress for Tropical 
Agriculture- Overcoming Challenges to Developing Sustainable Agri-Food Systems in 
the Tropics, Port of Spain.
Talekar, N.S.,  F.C. Su, and M.Y. Lin. 2003. How to Grow Safer Leafy Vegetables in Nethouses 
and Net Tunnels. International Cooperator’s Guide, no. 03-558.  Taiwan. 
Torres, A.P., and R.G. Lopez, R.G. Commercial Greenhouse Production: Measuring Daily 
Light Integral in a Greenhouse. http://www.extension.purdue.edu/extmedia/HO/HO-
238-W.pdf.  Accessed February 15, 2014.  
USAID. 2008. Protected Agriculture in Jamaica: A Reference Manual. Washington, DC: 
USAID.
Valenzuela, H.R.,  B.A. Kratky and J.J. Cho. 1996. Lettuce Production Guidelines for Hawaii. 
Manoa: CTAHR, College of Tropical Agriculture & Human Resources, University of 
Hawaii.
Walters, L.M., and K..G. Jones. 2012. Caribbean	Food	Import	Demand:	Influence	of	the	
Changing Dynamics of the Caribbean Economy. Paper presented at the 2012 Annual 
Meeting, Birmingham, Alabama.
Willits, D.H. 1993. Greenhouse Cooling. North Carolina Flower Growers’ Bulletin 38, no. 
2:15–18. 
———. 1994. Misting External Shade Cloths Part II: Does It Matter What Kind of Cloth? 
North Carolina Flower Growers’ Bulletin 39, no. 6:1–5. 
Willits, D.H., and M.M. Peet. 2000. Intermittent Application of Water to an Externally 
Mounted, Greenhouse Shade Cloth to Modify Cooling Performance. Transactions of 
the ASAE-American Society of Agricultural Engineers 43, no. 5:1247–252. 
Yeager, T., T. Bilderback, D. Fare, C. Gilliam, J. Lea-Cox, A. Niemiera, and T. Whitwell. 
2007. Best Management Practices: Guide for Producing Nursery Crops. Atlanta, GA: 
Southern Nursery Assn.
    
 
| 139
Natural Crop Protection 
Methods in the Caribbean
Wendy-Ann P. Isaac and Ayub Khan
INTRODUCTION
With the ever increasing population throughout the Caribbean, satisfying 
the demand for food becomes the very basic goal of regional agricultural 
production efforts. Crop production is, however, particularly at risk as 
substantial losses may occur due to high infestation of insect pests, diseases, 
weeds and other potentially harmful organisms.  For crop production to meet 
food security objectives, there must be marked improvement in insect pest, 
disease and weed management.  During the 1970s and 1980s, crop protection 
experts advocated the increased use of broad-spectrum synthetic pesticides 
to promote crop production. Consequently, the majority of small, resource-
poor farmers throughout the Caribbean have developed an unhealthy reliance 
on pesticides which has become a crucial component towards achieving 
optimum farm productivity. Fernandez et al. (2007) noted that increased 
pesticide use results from poor land management practices together with 
loss of agricultural lands to other economic activities. The resulting massive 
pest outbreaks from this unhealthy reliance on pesticides therefore demands 
reconsideration of crop protection approaches throughout the Caribbean.
Before the advent of synthetic pesticides, most farmers and agricultural 
practitioners throughout the Caribbean relied entirely on local or natural 
crop protection methods.  Crop protection methods were based on natural 
products which were not only environmentally friendly, but also culturally 
acceptable, affordable, cost effective and sustainable.  Cultural control 
measures are knowledge-based and the methods and practices associated 
with this type of control are easily accepted and adopted.  Natural and/or 
cultural control strategies are very diverse and practices are complementary 
in most cases.  For clarification, some cultural control strategies include:
C H A P T E R  FIVE
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
• Use of disease free plant material and seeds
• Practice of crop rotation as this interrupts the life cycle and feeding habits of insects
• Intercropping and multi-cropping for control of weeds and insects
• Use of plants as sources of bio-rational pesticides (e.g. marigold, neem)
• Field sanitation - keeping fields clean at all times
Contrary to widespread beliefs, the use of natural, non-chemical crop protection evolved 
mainly as a result of socio-economic constraints, environmental conditions, natural habitat 
and the determination to survive (Stoll 1988).  Stoll (1988) further stated that ‘non-chemical 
protection practices by small holders and organic farmers attempt to make maximum use 
of local knowledge resources’.  
Local knowledge is defined as the knowledge of a person or people within various 
communities that is considered holistically correct.  This local knowledge has been developed 
over centuries.  Local knowledge is not confined to specific areas.  It can be rural or urban. 
All developing communities possess local knowledge.  It is knowledge that has been tested 
and proven by past experiences and then adapted into culture and rituals.  Local knowledge 
is passed from one generation to the next by word of mouth.  It has its uniqueness in certain 
geographical areas.  It is not uncommon to find different people in different countries who 
share the same practices.  
According to Warburton and Martin (1999), local knowledge relates to the entire system 
of concepts, beliefs and perceptions that people hold about the world around them.  This 
includes the way people observe and measure their surroundings, how they solve problems 
and validate new information.  It includes the processes whereby knowledge is generated, 
solves problems and transmitted to one another.
Indigenous knowledge on the other hand is a knowledge system that is unique and sacred 
to a particular society.  Its movement or passage between generations occurs through what 
is known as oral traditions.  The preservation of various customs and beliefs through this 
type of knowledge system enabled the conservation of agricultural practices, health benefits 
and environmental protection.  This knowledge is often compared with local knowledge 
and often times the definition is used interchangeably.  According to one writer, indigenous 
knowledge is local knowledge that is unique to a culture or society.  Indigenous knowledge 
has also been referred to as ‘folk knowledge’ or ‘people’s science’ (Senanayake 2006).                   
Indigenous knowledge systems have played important roles in the debate on cultural 
policies and developmental planning in some countries.  Warren et al. (1995) noted that ‘local 
people know a great deal about their environment in which they have lived for generations.’ 
Darkoh (2009) stated that a blend of modern science and local knowledge will be required 
| 141
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
to face the challenges of the environment on a sustainable basis in the decades ahead for 
many in Africa.  Certainly, this view is relevant not only for Africa, but for most developing 
countries, and in particular the Caribbean region.
Local knowledge must be preserved to promote sustainable agriculture. Within the 
confinements of agriculture and food security, the incorporation of local knowledge would 
impact the dependency on synthetic chemical methods of crop protection.  Communities 
have successfully utilized local knowledge for centuries and its worth should never be 
underestimated.  
Prior to synthetic chemical inputs, farmers and practitioners relied entirely on natural 
protection methods.  Today however, there is a grave risk that much local knowledge is 
being lost and, along with it, valuable knowledge about ways of living sustainably.  
This chapter focuses on local and natural, non-chemical crop protection practices used on 
various crops throughout the Caribbean region.  It will detail the significance of promoting 
and supporting these ecologically based strategies for the sustainable production of food 
for small producers to ensure food security in the region.  It will provide a compilation 
of surveys conducted among aging farmers of successful practices used throughout the 
Caribbean and will also explore other examples which could be successfully adopted from 
other countries.  It attempts to not only to promote the use of local knowledge of small farm 
holders but also to strengthen it with external knowledge and scientific references.  Research 
has shown that an integrated or holistic approach to crop protection is recommended.  For 
such an approach, it is clear that appropriate crop protection strategies for small farmers can 
only result from a thorough understanding of the interrelationships between the natural, 
technological and socio-economic conditions.  It is therefore important for farmers to 
understand the principles of crop protection and then adapt, rather than adopt, promising 
pest management techniques to their unique situations. 
OVERVIEW OF LOCAL AND NATURAL CROP PROTECTION 
PRACTICES THROUGHOUT THE CARIBBEAN
Pest management presents one of the greatest challenges to farmers throughout the 
Caribbean region.  Collectively, a group of farmers interviewed to assess their local crop 
protection knowledge experienced the same types of pest problems.  Pest damage caused 
by insects included damage to leaves, stems, fruits, tubers, and even entire plants.  A wide 
range of non-chemical, natural materials and methods are employed for pest management 
across the region.  Some of the more important ones include:
Ash: which is obtained by burning of leaves, branches, parts of trees and grasses is 
sprinkled on plants to prevent damage by pest insects.  Ash is also placed around the roots 
142 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
of plants, trees and other crops showing signs of insect damage.  This is a very common 
practice on banana and plantain (Musa spp.) farms in the Caribbean.  Most farmers believe 
that it is the best remedy for nematodes and weevils which attack these crops.  Ash is also 
used as a protective covering against biting insects in particular on some vegetable beds. 
After harvesting of some crops (eg. yams (Dioscorea esculentum), the exposed area is 
dipped into ash before storing to protect against post-harvest storage insects.  Dried seeds 
and beans are also stored with a mixture of ash and ground black pepper (Piper nigrum). 
The use of ground bay leaf (Pimenta racemosa) leaves together with ash was reported to 
be effective against stored pest insects.
Soapy water: The use of soapy water is also very common among farmers.  This solution 
was made primarily with “blue soap” (detergent bar) and is sprayed or sprinkled on insect 
affected plants.  This practice was used to control aphids, mealybugs and scale insects.
Marigold: Grainge and Ahmed (1988) noted that a variety of plants and their extracts 
can also be used against many pest organisms. The planting of marigold (Tagetes spp.) 
between certain crops reduces the incidence of insect damage.  Marigold flowers produce 
an unpleasant odour which acts as an insect repellent.  The leaves and flowers are crushed 
and soaked either overnight or for a few days in water.  The mixture is then strained to 
remove the solid parts and the remaining mixture is used to spray vegetable and other food 
crops for the management of various caterpillars and aphids.
Garlic: The use of garlic either alone or in combination with other plant extracts (eg. 
hot pepper (Capsicum spp.) as an insect deterring agent is quite common.  Like marigold, 
it has an unpleasant odor that repels insects and produces a burning sensation on contact 
with the skin.  Two bulbs of garlic, crushed and soaked in about 2 litres of water would 
make a strong enough concoction that can be applied to plants and other infested crops.  
Neem: Some farmers also experiment with neem (Azadirachta indica). The leaves and 
seeds were either crushed and soaked in water for several days or boiled to make a strong 
solution which is then used to protect crops against insect damage and infestation.  The 
use and effectiveness of neem is highlighted by Stoll (1988).
Urine: Both human and cow urine are also commonly used in crop protection throughout 
the region.  They are either administered in their fresh or stale form by collecting urine 
from the household or farm each morning.  The urine is then poured into cut bamboo 
joints (about 9 joints in total) and left for seven to nine days to ferment, producing a very 
pungent scent. The resulting fermented urine can be diluted or used as is.  The stale solution 
is believed to be a good insect repellent.  The use of urine is particularly prevalent among 
farmers who cultivate banana, plantain, vegetables and citrus. The application of urine to 
| 143
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
plants is usually done during the evening time as most insects pests associated with these 
crops feed at night. 
Kerosene: Both kerosene and diesel are also utilized as pest management options in the 
destruction of ant nests by burning and also along the crop field perimeter or along fences 
to avoid the intrusion of pests.  Disinfectants (e.g. ‘black disinfectant’ or Jeyes Fluid) are 
also used in the same manner as kerosene and diesel.
Larger pests: Most studies of natural pesticides are concerned with their effects on 
insects. However, in many cases, the management of larger pests including birds, lizards, 
rats, squirrels and snakes also present a serious challenge.  In some instances, farmers have 
reported using substances such as diesel and kerosene around the boundaries of their fields 
to restrict to the entry of snakes, lizards and rats in particular while others are destroyed 
by the use of shot guns or homemade devices (e.g. slingshots). Despite its significance 
as Tobago’s national bird, the Cocrico (Ortalis	ruficauda), is considered a pest by some 
farmers and home-based practices such as soaking fruits in alcohol to cause intoxication 
of the birds is also utilized. Scarecrows are sometimes also utilized to control the Cocrico. 
Farine, a local product made using cassava is soaked in water and then left in the field as 
a trap for birds.  When eaten, it chokes the birds and allows them to be easily caught and 
destroyed.  Traps are made for some types of birds using the latex from the outer bark of 
selected trees, especially breadfruit (Artocarpus altilis) and locally referred to as ‘laglee’. 
This is then left to ‘set’ and becomes very sticky.  This sticky substance (laglee) is then 
spread over very thin pieces of sticks and placed in strategic locations in the field to trap 
birds.  Various traps are made to capture mammalian pests including rats (Rattus spp.), 
manicou (Didelphis marsupialis), agouti (Dasyprocta leporina) and squirrels (Sciurus 
granatensis) in particular. 
Uncultivated sites can provide refuge for weeds during the non-crop period.  Traditionally, 
most weeds are controlled physically by ‘cutlassing’ or burning.  Some Caribbean farmers 
practise mulching or intercropping of cover crops as a form of, or to facilitate weed control. 
Intercropping also minimizes the incidence of insect pests as the case of Thrips palmi Karny 
(Thysanoptera: Thripidae) in Cuba where damage to vegetable and row crops is reduced 
when they are intercropped with corn (Venotola 2013). 
Farmers in some Caribbean islands practise biological control on their farms.  Cuban 
farmers are an excellent and successful example of the use of this form of pest management. 
Venotola (2013) stated that Cuban farmers use the natural enemy, Trichogramma spp. 
(Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae).  These are small wasps which parasitize the eggs of a 
range of crop pest insects including the cassava hornworm (Erinnyis ello L. (Lepidoptera: 
144 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
Sphingidae), the tobacco budworm (Heliothis virescens F. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and 
the sugarcane borer (Diatraea saccharalis F. (Lepidoptera:Crambidae). Additionally, 
farmers also use homegrown biopesticides including Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) to control 
mosquitoes and lepidopterous pests which affect crucifers and corn, citrus, potato leafminers 
and mites.  A local strain of the entomopathogenic fungus, Beauveria bassiana, is used 
to control the sweet potato weevil Cylas formicarius F. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) with 
much success.  Farmers also use the carnivorous bighead ant, Pheidole megacephala F. 
(Hymenoptera: Formicidae) which is found in banana plantations to kill the sweet potato 
weevil. Korada (2010) described the Cuban farmers’ technique of rolling these ants in 
banana leaves for transport to sweet potato fields.  The whitefly Bemisia tabaci Gennadius 
(Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) which is a pest of a range of crop plants is controlled by farmers 
who spray a suspension of the fungus Verticillium lecanii on their crops, particularly 
tomatoes and beans (Nicholls et al. 2002).
Table 5.1: Management of field and storage pests in the Caribbean
Crop Problem experienced Pest Local Protection Method(s)
Cabbage Browning of leaves, Bacterial attack, Treat with garlic and 
blackened cabbage and caterpillars and bachacs pepper solution
bitten leaves (leaf cutting ants)
Corn Damage to young cobs Armyworms Place dry soil / ash in 
 and leaves ‘heart’ of corn plant 
Cowpea Damaged leaves Bachac Spray with garlic and/or 
neem solution
Cucumber Holes in fruits, insect Worms, fruit flies Spray with neem solution
damaged leaves
Lettuce Damaged leaves, holes in Bachac Sprinkle with ash
leaves
Ochro/Okra Deformed fruits and leaf Caterpillars Sprinkle with ash
spots
Peppers Fruits burnt or sunburn, Bachac and caterpillars Sprinkle with ash
leaves eaten by ants
Pigeon pea Damaged pods and ant Worms Sprinkle with ash
infestation
Pumpkin Mildew on leaves Fungus Remove leaves and 
sprinkle ash, spray with 
baking soda
Tomato Stunted growth, curling Fruit flies and caterpillars Drench with marigold 
leaves and damaged fruits water / plant marigold 
around crop
Watermelon Mildew, Insect bites Bachac and ants Spray with neem
| 145
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Table 5.2: Insect and disease problems in crops and local crop protection 
methods used and knowledge source
Crop Problem Insect/ Local protection method(s)
pathogen
Root Crops Wilting of tips; Shoot flies Remove affected plants by hand and 
stunted growth spray with soapy water
Cassava Cutting of leaves and Bachac /Ants and Spray bed with neem solution.
stalks mole cricket Drench roots with diluted urine late 
evening 3 times/week
Heart or middle of tuber Beetle, Bachac, Spray with soapy water, black 
Dasheen eaten and holes on Ants disinfectant and neem solution 
leaves separately each time
Yam Leaves of vine eaten Bachac Spray with neem and ash solution
Stem, leaves and tubers Bachac Spray separately each time with soapy 
eaten, leaving holes water, black disinfectant and neem 
solution 
Sweet potato Hollowing of stems; Stem borer Spray with soapy and garlic water
Damage to tubers and 
leaves are eaten
Vegetable crops Sticky leaves and Aphid, Thrips Spray with neem and garlic solution 
deformed fruits, brown weekly. Spray marigold crushed in 
marks on leaves water and left to soak overnight
Watermelon Drastic wilting of leaves Fungus (Bacterial Drench with urine and sprinkle ashes 
and veins and eventual wilt) on leaves
death of plant
‘Bad eye’ or ‘Maljoe’ Place blue bottles in field on sticks
Mildew on leaves; Fungus (Powdery Remove leaves and sprinkle ashes on
White powdery spots on mildew)
leaves, gradually turn 
Pumpkin completely yellow and 
leaves fall off and vines 
eventually die
Wilted plants, stunted Small worms Plant marigold as a cover crop 
growth (Nematodes) between and around beds. Sprinkle 
ashes on bed and plants
Wilted plants and Fungus (Southern Mulch with grass clippings.  Rotate 
extensive lower stem blight) crops to avoid planting peppers in the 
Peppers rot causing eventual same plot 2 years in a row
death
Seedlings suddenly fall Wilting Do not over water plants especially at 
over and rot (Damping off) young stage
Fruits burnt or sunburnt, Bachac and Sprinkle ashes
leaves eaten by ants caterpillars
146 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
Crop Problem Insect/ Local protection method(s)
pathogen
Large holes in leaves Fruit flies; Kill when seen.  Spray plants with 
and young plants Caterpillar crushed marigold in water after 
completely stripped leaving to soak
Curling and yellowing Whiteflies Plant marigold around beds and spray 
Tomato of leaves and immature with soapy water. Spray with black 
fruits disinfectant in late evenings
Dark brown or black Blossom end rot Do not over water plants especially at 
spots on the bottoms of young stage and drench soil with black 
immature fruits disinfectant before planting
Cutting of leaves and Bachac, Ants, Bed sprayed with neem solution.  
in some cases stalk by Mole cricket Drench roots with diluted urine late 
insects evening 3 times / week
Melongene Lesions on leaves, Blight Sprinkle ashes on leaves and drench 
wilting and eventual roots with diluted urine and other 
death times with black disinfectant
Black rot on cabbage Fungus Treat with garlic and pepper solution;
and in heart when cut Drench bed with black disinfectant 
before planting; Sprinkle ashes on bed
Cabbage Large holes on leaves Caterpillar; Ants Handpick and drop them in soap 
water. Plant marigold in between beds
Holes in fruits, leaves Worms Spray bed with neem, soapy or pepper 
are damaged solution;
Sprinkle ashes on bed before planting
Cucumber Plant turns yellowish, Fungus Drench bed with black disinfectant 
looking like it was before planting and sprinkle ashes on 
sprayed with herbicide, bed
plant eventually wilts 
and dies
Cowpea Damaged leaves Bachac Spray with garlic solution along with 
neem solution
Melting of leaves Fungus Drench soil before planting with black 
disinfectant
Lettuce and Leaves curl with light Aphids, Virus Drench soil before planting with black 
Pakchoi brown discoloration disinfectant
along parts of the leaf
Damaged leaves, holes Worms Spray with neem and nutgrass root 
in leaves solution
Brownish spots on Fungus Drench soil before planting with black 
leaves disinfectant and urine.  Use ashes on 
Corn young leaves
Heart of corn eaten Worms Use sand and ashes in heart of corn
| 147
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Crop Problem Insect/ Local protection method(s)
pathogen
Tree crops Root damage, tree Beetles and Spread ashes around root of plant.  
collapsed and wilted nematodes Drench root with urine
leaves
Reduced plant growth, Beetle Drench root with black disinfectant. 
choking of the bunch in Drench root with urine.  Spread ashes 
the trunk, yellow leaves around roots
Banana/plantain and weak or dying 
suckers
Leaves dry out Fungus (Panama Drench roots with urine and sprinkle 
wilt) ashes around roots of plant.  Cut down 
infected tree and burn it
Curling of leaves; Brown Aphids Spray with soapy water and other 
spots on leaves times with neem solution
Holes in fruits Black bee Spray with neem
Citrus Fruits become damaged Bachac, biting Spread soapy water around root and 
and fall off tree. Leaves ants sprinkle ashes on leaves
eaten by insects and 
later become covered 
with ants and remain 
stunted
Unevenness and Cocoa pod borer Spray trees with soapy water and 
premature ripening in neem solution
both the young and 
mature pod
Cocoa Small, hard, dark spots Black pod Drench around roots with urine
on any part of the pod
Affects shoots, flowers Fungus Drench around trees with black 
and pods.  Patches that disinfectant from early stage.  Keep 
give the appearance of field clean by pruning trees and 
uneven ripening weeding around trees
Coconut Leaves become red and Coconut beetle Use table salt in “heart” of leaves
fall off pre-maturely
Table 5.3: Non-chemical methods used to prevent insects during post-
harvest including storage
Crop Initial treatment Post-harvest protection
Cassava Leave tubers on stem Tubers should be stored in damp area for 
not more than 2 days.
Sweet potato Clean to remove dirt Keep in cool dry area and dust with ashes
Yam Remove excessive dirt Dust cut surfaces with ashes
Cocoa Sweat beans and sundry then Lemon juice can be added to protect 
wash beans beans
148 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
Table 5.4: Non-chemical storage of vegetative plant parts
Crop Method used
Yams Hang yams on tree in field till sprouts emerge.  Store in cool area 
under tree
Potato Slips or plant part should be stored in cool area, (e.g. in banana 
stool root)
Cassava Cuttings are stored in upright position in cool, dry area at home or 
in field
Dasheen, tannia and Cormels and heads are stored in moist area until needed
eddoes
Corn Shell and dry grains in sunlight. Remove unwanted spoilt grains. 
Store in bags using black pepper.  Dry cobs are tied together and 
are hung over a fireside to be smoked.  This protects corn from 
weevil attack.
Sun dry and shell pods.  Store in cloth bags after dusting with ashes, 
Pigeon pea clove and grounded bay leaves
Yams Dusting - Dust top or head with ash and store in cool area
NATURAL CONTROL OF SELECTED INSECT PESTS 
Vegetable crops
Diamondback moth (DBM)
Plutella xylostella L. (Lepidoptera:Plutellidae)
Main crops affected: Brassica spp. – Cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower, pak choi
Control measures:
Preventive practices:
• Control all whitetop (Parthenium hysterophorus) in area around the crop
• Scout field regularly (at least twice weekly) to look for incidence of pests
• Practise crop rotation. Avoid planting the same crop family for a second cycle
Cultural practices:
• Intercropping cabbage with tomato and the application of neem extracts has shown 
promising results (Shankar et al. 2007)
• Planting marigold (Tagetes spp.) as a trap crop has given 30–50 percent reduction 
of the larval population (Stoll 1988)
| 149
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
• Early morning overhead irrigation reduces egg laying and causes adults to fall to 
ground where they are consumed by predators (e.g. ants)  
• Field sanitation – removal and destruction of crop residues reduce incidence of 
diamondback moth in subsequent crop
The use of insect repellent plants is also recommended (Stoll 1988).  These include: 
Annona spp., Chilli, Mammea americana, Neem seed extracts, Tephrosia candida and 
tumeric. Other methods include the use of Bacillus thuringiensis and saturated green sticky 
traps (Hallett et al. 1995)  
Leaf miner fly
Liriomyza sativae (Blanch.) and Liriomyza trifolii  (Burgess) (Diptera:Agromyzidae)
Main crops affected: cabbage, cucumber, legumes, tomato
Control measures:
Preventive measures:
• Use non infested planting material
• Scout field regularly and remove and destroy infested plants and/or leaves 
immediately
• If possible, use resistant varieties
• Remove any plant debris at the end of the growing season 
Natural enemies:
Parasitoids such as Diglyphus minoeus (Walker) (Hymenoptera:Eulophidae) and Opius 
sp. (Hymenoptera:Braconidae) can provide as much as 50–90 percent parasitism for 
these leafminers (Cock et. al. 1985). Use insect controlling plants/plant extracts such 
as neem, quassia and hot pepper. Aqueous quassia extract gave better control than the 
synthetic insecticide malathion (Pluke et al. 1999). Other methods of control include 
the yellow leafminer sticky trap and ash.  
Whitefly
Bemisia tabaci Gennadius (Homoptera:Aleyrodidae)
Main crops affected: Tomato, sweet pepper, melongene, sweet potato, poinsettia, crucifers
Control measures:
Cultural practices: 
• Use of disease free plant material as infected plants may spread viral diseases
• Encourage natural enemies (parasitoids – Encarsia spp. (Hymenoptera:Aphelinidae) 
150 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
and Eretmocerus spp. (Hymenoptera:Aphelinidae) and predators – ladybird beetles, 
syrphid fly, lacewing insects). 
• Entomopathogenic fungus, Paecilomyces fumosoroseus – kills the whitefly adults 
but has no effect on the plants (Matthew and Khan 2013)
• Use yellow sticky traps hung just above the crop canopy
• Other traditional methods (e.g. the use of kerosene-soap emulsion and milk powder 
spray to keep the adults from flying). 
• Intercrop vegetable crops with corn (Venotola 2013)
Root crops
Sweet potato weevil
Cylas formicarius (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
Main crop affected: Sweet potato
Control measures:
Preventive measures:
• Frequent scouting of fields for adult weevils and remove and destroy
• Planting in late rainy season, as practised in Kenya. Pest attack is high on the foliage 
before the onset of the dry season.  The tubers begin to enlarge when it rains again, 
but few soil cracks are present.  As a result, weevils cannot gain access to the tubers 
and their numbers diminish.  
Cultural methods:
• Crop rotation or fallow to reduce the weevil population
• Manage host weeds belonging to the Morning Glory family
• Thick skinned, early maturing varieties and those which form tubers deeper in the 
soil should be planted  
• Use clean, uninfested cuttings as planting materials to reduce incidence of pests 
(weevils, moths, diseases)   
• Practise field sanitation by removal of crop residue as this reduces weevil populations
• Moulding vines fills cracks in the soil and prevents access to tubers by weevils
• Pheromone traps should be used for early detection and mating disruption
• Tubers for storage can be covered with a layer of sand (at least 5cm) or dusted with 
ash
| 151
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Fruit crops
Banana weevil
Cosmopolites sordidus (Germar)(Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
Main crops affected: Banana and plantain
Control measures:
Several natural enemies have been introduced into the Caribbean to control C. 
sordidus including Plaesius javanus Erichs (Coleoptera: Histeridae), Dactylosternum 
hydrophiloides (Macleay) (Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae) and D. abdominale (F.)
(Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae) from South-East Asia and Hololepta quadridentata (F.) 
(Coleoptera: Histeridae) a native species of Trinidad (Cock et al. 1985). Entomopathogenic 
fungi such as Metarhizum anisopliae and Beauveria bassiana can also be used and 
provide some degree of control (Khan and Gangapersad 2001). 
Cultural methods:
• Use of clean planting material (infestation drops from 24 percent to five percent)
• Cutting old pseudostems off at ground level
• Removal of old pseudostems at regular intervals reduces continuous breeding of 
the weevil
• Removal or destruction of stumps of wind-damaged plants
• Treatment of infested suckers with hot water
• Use pseudostem traps to collect then destroy adult weevils. Entomopathogenic fungi 
can be combined with these traps (Khan and Gangapersad 2001)
Pineapple mealybug
Dysmicoccus brevipes Cockerell (Hemiptera:Pseudococcidae)
Main crops affected: pineapple, sugarcane, coffee, plantain
Control measures:
A number of natural enemies attack this mealybug in the Caribbean including Hambletonia 
pseudococcinna Compere (Hymenoptera: Encrytidae) which is found in several islands of 
the Lesser Antilles (Cock et al. 1985).  Management of this pest is essential not only due to 
crop losses as a result of direct feeding but also because of its ability to spread pathogens. 
This pineapple mealybug spreads the associated wilt viruses which have recently been 
detected in the Caribbean (Cuba) for the first time (Hernandez et al. 2010).  A hot water 
treatment of pineapple crowns at 50°C for 30 minutes gave complete control of the 
152 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
pineapple mealybug associated wilt virus and also allowed 100 percent plant survival 
(Ullman et al. 1993)  
Cultural methods:
• Bait made of powdered skimmed milk, wheat flour, wheat middling and insecticide 
was attractive to ants tending pineapple mealybug.  Death of ants after feeding on 
bait caused 75 percent reduction in mealybug population (Rai and Sinha 1980) 
• Removal and burning of crop residues before replanting reduces ant and mealybug 
population in new crop
Fruit flies 
Anastrepha spp. (Diptera:Tephritidae)
Main crops affected: guava, (Psidium guajava L.), sapodilla (Manilkara zapota), and 
numerous soft fruits
Control measures:
Management of Anastrepha spp. requires a multi-pronged approach (i.e. IPM). Several 
natural enemies have been introduced into the Caribbean for management of these fruit 
flies but limited success has been recorded (Cock et al. 1985).    
Cultural methods:
• Regular collection and destruction of fallen fruits 
• Bagging of individual fruits may be an option for small farms and backyard gardens
• Extracts from the plant, Piper auritum can kill 78 – 90 percent of larvae (Perales-
Segovia et al. 1996)
• A fruit fly trap attractant was developed in Guyana for trapping sapodilla fruit fly 
Anastrepha serpentina (Pluke et al. 1999):
ƒ 2 litres of water
ƒ 20ml vanilla extract
ƒ 1 green, grated sapodilla
ƒ 30ml honey
ƒ 240ml diluted human or cattle urine
| 153
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Box 5.1: Other pests and diseases which can be managed using some 
common insect repellent plants found throughout the Caribbean:
• Cowpea weevil (Callosobruchus chinensis/maculatus) – can be controlled 
by using custard apple, neem, Christmas bush (Chromolaena odorata) and 
marigold.
• Thrips (Thrips palmi) – can be controlled using fresh red chili, garlic, pepper, 
bitter gourd/carille (Mormodica charantis), custard apple, billy goat weed 
(Ageratum conizyoides) and Christmas bush.
• Damping off – moringa leaves and garlic can be useful
• Fusarium wilt – moringa root, celery and seed under leaf (Phyllanthus niruri) 
can be useful
• Fungi – can be controlled using aloe vera (Aloe barbadensis) and garlic (Allium 
sativum).
• Root rot – can be controlled using seed under leaf, citronella and eucalyptus. 
PHYSICAL CONTROL OF PESTS
There are several ways in which a farmer can manage agricultural pests and diseases 
without relying on chemicals.  The following is a list and brief description of some of these 
methods:
Prevention through good sanitation practices
Improving and changing the conditions of the garden area can make it difficult for pests 
to survive.  This can be achieved through destruction of food sources and habitats and 
breeding areas for pests, controlling weeds, practising crop rotation, using companion 
crops that attract beneficial insects, proper water and fertilizer management and using plant 
species that are tolerant to pest and disease attack.  Such an integrated crop management 
approach is considered as one of the easiest and cheapest methods that the farmer can 
adopt without the use of chemicals.
154 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
Box 5.2: Prevention and control methods for insects and diseases
For insect control:
• Regular field scouting is recommended to look for insect pests and infected plants. 
Where there are low cases of insect or disease incidence, remove pests manually from 
infested plants and burn to avoid further infestation and contamination.  Spraying 
with concentrated lime water mixed at a ratio of one part per lime water to three parts 
water, or use 0.5 kg, plus 0.5 kg of ashes from hardwood trees mixed with 20 litres 
of water may also be useful.  Mix together, filter and then spray over the collected, 
infested plants.
• Practise companion planting using plants such as marigolds, tomatoes and chive 
with vegetables.  The smell of these plants serves to repel insects when their leaves 
are crushed.  
• Use of colour and light to trap and trick insects.  Insects can be attracted to various 
colours such as blue, red and yellow.  Yellow sticky traps can be used to capture insects 
while insect-luring lights can be used using blue light.  A simple insect-luring light can 
be made as follows:
ƒ Place a big bowl of water under a light source.  Add petroleum oil to the 
water to entrap any fallen insects.  If a blue light is not available, you can 
wrap the bulb with blue paper or tape. Take all necessary precautions. 
• Use sulphur powder for mite outbreaks by diluting 75 ml in 20 litres of water.  This 
solution can be sprayed over and under the leaves of infected plants.  Diluted 
fermented cow urine can also be used as a substitute for sulphur sprays. 
For disease control:
• Adjust soil pH before planting using dolomite, egg or sea shells or burned animal 
bones pounded and mixed into the soil.  This will also help to reduce disease and water 
logging in the soil.  For sandy soil, add 250 kg of dolomite mixture per acre (617 kg/
ha); for loam soil, add 500 kg of dolomite mixture per acre (1,235 kg/ha) and for clay 
soil, add of dolomite mixture 700 kg per acre (1,729 kg/ha).
• Avoid application of too much nitrogen fertilizer as plants will grow too quickly, use too 
much water, and their cell walls will become susceptible to the penetration of fungi.
• Remove infected plants immediately when discovered and spray trees with fermented 
bio liquids such as compost teas.  
(Adapted from Tancho, 2013). | 155
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Box 5.3: Advantages of natural plant insecticides
• There are about 2,500 different plants with insecticidal properties.  Many of them contain 
potent substances such as alkaloids, ricin, capsaicin, rotenone, thiopene, terpenoids, 
phenols, azadiracthin, pyrethrum, nicotine, solanine, etc.  
• Natural plant substances are usually safe and non-toxic to humans and animals.
• They do not leave any toxic residues.
• Chances of insect resistance are minimal compared to synthetic chemicals.
• They are cheap to produce and readily available or can be easily made by the user.
• They have huge economic potential and can be used in extract form.  
Source: Tancho, 2013
Selected plants used to control insect pests
There are several plants which may have natural pest repellent properties. The use of 
plant extracts is not new and extracted plant compounds such as rotenone, nicotine and 
pyrethrins have been used by small-scale subsistence and even commercial producers.  
Collecting extracted substances from plant parts
There are a few things to consider before collecting parts of desired plants.  The age of the 
plant will affect how much substances can be extracted.  The time for collection is also very 
important because each substance will be available in varying amounts depending on the 
season and time of day.  The effective substances originate from the plants’ own biochemical 
processes and are stored in specific places as part of their own defense system.  In some 
plants such as tobacco, it is found in the leaf.  For peppers, it is located in the fruit.  Neem 
and custard apples store their insecticidal substances in their seeds.  Lemon grass provides 
the maximum effects at 7–11 months. Collection from leaves should be done during the 
day in dry weather.  It is necessary, therefore, to know each type of plant and where their 
effective substances are stored in order to be able to collect them correctly for use against 
pests.  For plants which contain volatile oil, such as basil and Christmas bush, the maximum 
amount can only be collected in the morning.  In these plants, sunlight reduces the amount 
of volatile oil in the leaf.  The most common extraction methods include: fermentation, 
steam distillation, compression and extraction using solvents.  Table 5.5 offers some useful 
generalizations on the best time to harvest plants.  
156 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
Table 5.5: Harvesting plant parts
Part of plant Time to be harvested
Flower When the flower starts to bloom
Fruit Before the fruit becomes ripe and the substances transfer to the seeds
Seed When fruit is fully ripe
Root / tuber Start of flowering in winter and dry season
Peel During summer or early in the rainy season before new leaves 
Leaf Daytime in dry weather
Leaf (Volatile oil) Dawn
Source: Tancho, 2013
The following common plants found throughout the Caribbean have been reported 
as having pest repellent properties:
Ackee (Blighia sapida)
Family: Sapindaceae
Ethanol and acetone extracts of ackee were also recorded as repellent to three pests 
(Khan and Gumbs 2003) while extracts in hexane were toxic to the sweet potato 
weevil C. elegantulus (Wilson and Mansingh 2004). Wilson (1993) also concluded 
that ethanolic extract from ackee gave better control of diamondback moth 2 weeks 
after field application compared to neem extract.  
Powdered seeds of ackee were toxic to three stored product pests – cowpea 
beetle Callosobruchus maculatus F. (Coleoptera:Bruchidae), Rusty grain beetle 
Cryptolestes ferrugineus (Stephens) (Coleoptera: Cucujidae) and  maize weevil 
Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) (Khan et al. 2002). 
Annona – soursop (Annona muritica), sweetsop (Annona squamosa), 
custard apple (Annona reticulata)
Family: Annonaceae
The unripe fruit, seeds, leaves and roots have been found to have potent ovicidal, 
insecticidal, repellent and nematicidal properties.  Compounds isolated from A. montana 
have been shown to possess powerful antifeedant activity (Mootoo et al. 2000). The active 
chemical is called, acetogenin.  
Grind seeds into powder and soak one kg of the powder in 10 litres of water, leaving 
undisturbed for 12–24 hours.  Filter with a thin white cloth.  
| 157
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Before using, mix the solution with a sticking agent such as powdered detergent or 
dishwashing liquid at a rate of one tbsp. detergent to ten litres of solution.
The dark green leaves can be ground or crushed before soaking in water for 24 hours. 
Mix the solution before using and add a sticking agent at the same rate as above.
Powdered seeds of custard apple have also been used to control lice (Ayensu 1981), aphids, 
diamond back moth caterpillar, leafhoppers and various types of grasshoppers.  
Basil – Sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum) and Holy basil or Tulsi 
(Ocimum sanctum)
Family: Lamiaceae
The plants have insecticidal, fungicidal, repellent and molluscidal properties.  O. sanctum 
seeds are used as a mosquito larvicide.  It can also be effective against the housefly larva and 
the sweet potato weevil (Sujatha et al. 1988).   Essential oil can also be extracted from the 
leaves.  About 20 mls of the essential oil of basil mixed into 1 litre of water can be sprayed 
onto vegetables to control pest and diseases.
Berry leaf – Jamaican gooseberry (Phyllanthus acuminatus)
Family: Phyllanthaceae
A powder of its roots is used to control melonworm (Diaphania hyalinata) and 
diamondback moth (P. xylostella) (Pluke et al. 1999).
Black pepper (Piper nigrum)
Family: Piperaceae
Contains essential oils that repel insects.  
Grind dried black pepper fruit then soak in rice whisky.  Filter out the solids and spray 
the remaining solution.  Effective against aphids and the cabbage-heart caterpillar (Tancho 
2013).  
Castor oil plant (Ricinus communis)
Family: Euphorbiaceae
Can be grown around the garden to keep away pests.  The active chemical is called ricin. 
The leaves and seeds are effective against termites, crickets, nematodes and rats.
158 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
Chilli – pepper, hot pepper (Capsicum frutescens)
Family: Solanaceae
The skin and seeds of ripe fruits contain active insecticidal substances.  Its actions include 
– stomach poison, repellent, antifeedant, fumigant and viroid.  It is listed as being effective 
against ants, aphids, rice weevil and other beetles (Pluke et al. 1999).  Amoabeng et al., 
(2013) conclude that field application of C. frutescens extracts provided better control of 
diamondback moth than some synthetic insecticides and also had less detrimental effects 
on natural enemies including ladybird beetles, spiders and wasps which continued to feed 
on the pest after application
Christmas bush (Chromolaena odorata)
Family: Asteraceae
Contains eupatal which is a natural insecticide.
Grind the dried leaves and stems into a powder and soak 400g of the powder in eight 
litres of water.  Shake the mixture thoroughly before filtering.  Spray the solution every 
seven days for a total of six applications (Tancho 2013).
Can be used for the control of aphids, common cutworm, diamondback moth and grain 
storage pests.  
Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.)
Family: Myrtaceae
Contains essential oils that effectively repel and control many insects.  
Combine one kg of eucalyptus leaves with two tbsp. of ground ginger.  Boil the leaves for 
15–20 mins and filter.  The stock solution can be used with other sprays (Tancho 2013).
Effective against diamondback moth, common cutworm and grain storage pests.  
Fever grass – lemongrass (Cymbopogon citratus)
Family: Poaceae
Lemongrass extracts have been reported to possess powerful insecticidal and repellent 
properties (Anon 2014).
Grind the dried lemongrass and soak in water (400gm ground leaves to eight litres of 
water) for 24 hours.
The ground dried lemongrass can be blended with mung bean.  
Both the oil and dry powder is efficient at protecting stored seeds against the cowpea 
beetle Callosobrachus maculatus by inhibiting oviposition on the seeds (Ketoh et al. 2000). 
| 159
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Extracts from lemongrass were also toxic and repellent to the maize weevil S. zeamais 
(Ramlal 2014).  Also effective against the common cutworm and diamondback moth.
Garlic (Allium sativum)
Family: Amaryllidaceae
Alicin, which is a compound derived from garlic is effective against many types of fungi 
and can also be used as an insecticide and repellent as it inhibits feeding. 
To 150 gms of crushed garlic, add half litre of hot water and leave undisturbed for 24 
hours before filtering.  Add another four litres of water and mix with a sticking agent such 
as dishwashing liquid before spray.  Spray at least twice a day. 
Effective against beetles, aphids, nematodes, white flies, downy mildew, leaf rusts, fleas 
and ticks (Tancho 2013). 
 Gliricidia (Gliricidia sepium)
Family: Fabaceae
The active ingredient in gliricidia is coumarin and rotenone.  The leaves, bark and fruit 
of this plant all have insecticidal properties.  
Leaf extracts of G. sepium in ethanol were shown to cause high mortality and reduced egg 
laying in the carmine spider mite Tetranychus cinnabarinus (Sivira et al. 2011). The smoke 
from burning leaves and branches of G. sepium is used in the Philippines as a repellent 
against blood feeding insects (Obico and Ragragio 2014).
Lantana (Lantana camara)
Family: Verbenaceae
Contains lantadine and lantamine which is toxic to the nervous system of insects
One kg of the lantana seeds can be ground and then soaked in two litres of water and left 
for 24 hours.  After filtering, spray as an insecticide.
Can be used for the control of the army worm in corn.  It also repels insects that lay eggs 
in vegetable gardens (Tancho 2013).  
Mammey (Mammea Americana)
Family: Guttifereae
The seeds of the mammey can be finely ground and four kgs dissolved in 400 litres of 
soapy water or kerosene.  This can be used to control caterpillars.
225 gms of the leaves of the mammey can be soaked in 1.2 litres of kerosene. This is 
effective against cockroaches, houseflies and ants.  
160 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
Powder from the dried seeds has insecticidal properties with stomach poison, contact 
and repellent activity against aphids, diamondback moth, beetles, banana borer weevil and 
acoushi ants (Atta cephalotes).  Dusting cabbage with the dry powder early in the morning to 
allow it to stick on the leaves (wet with dew) and effects good control of diamondback moth 
(Pluke et al. 1999). The powder from dried leaves of mammey gave 59 percent and 75 percent 
control of S. frugiperda and D. hyalinata respectively (Morton 1987). Wrapping young 
tomato plant stems with a mammey leaf and then planting so that half is covered with soil 
and the other half exposed above ground prevents damage by mole crickets (Morton 1987). 
Marigold (Tagetes spp.)
Family: Compositae
The active chemical is called thiopene.  500 gms of marigold leaves can be boiled in four 
litres of water.  Allow to cool then filter.  Add another four litres of water and spray onto 
infested plants.   
The extracts of the leaves are effective against the diamondback moth, nematodes, beetles, 
aphids and cabbage heart caterpillar (Tancho 2013).
Milk bush (Euphorbia tirucalli)
Family: Euphorbiaceae 
Stems of the milk bush can be crushed and about 1 kilogram can be soaked in 15–20 litres 
of water.  Leave for a day.  Filter out the liquid and spray onto infested plants.  
The crushed stem can be used to control cowpea weevils, common cutworms, aphids and 
grain storage pests (Tancho 2013).
Moringa (Moringa oleifera)
Family: Moringaceae
Contains substances that kills fungi and bacteria.  Both seeds and leaves are effective. 
Mix moringa leaves with soil being prepared for sowing seeds; leave undisturbed for one 
week.  
Effective against root and stem rot of cucurbits, tomato fruit rot, and damping off.
Neem (Azadiractha indica)
Family: Meliceae
The leaves and seeds of the neem tree are known to possess insecticidal compounds, some 
of which is commercially available. The active chemical is called azadirachtin.  
| 161
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Grind the dried seeds and soak in the water in the proportion of one kg of neem seed to 
20 litres of water.  After leaving undisturbed for one to two days, spray onto infested crops. 
For dried neem fruit, soak one kg in ten litres of water.  
Aqueous extracts of either the seed or leaves provide good control of both lepidopterous 
and coleopterous larvae as well as leafminers, aphids and grasshoppers (Pluke et al. 1999). 
Dried seed powder can also be used effectively to control stored product insects.
Nutmeg (Myristica  fragrans)
Family: Myristicaceae
Nutmeg oil extract was both toxic and repellent to adult maize weevils S. zeamais (Ramlal 
2014). Nutmeg oil has strong insect feeding deterrent properties against stored product 
insects (Parthasarathy et al. 2008).
Papaya (Carica papaya)
Family: Caricaceae
The leaves of the papaya can be finely chopped and about one kg placed in one litre of 
water. Separate the liquid by filtering with a cloth. Combine the liquid with four litres of 
water and then mix in 16 gms of detergent and spray onto infected plant.
Can be used to manage rusts and powdery mildew (Tancho 2013).
Physic nut (Jatropha curcas)
Family: Euphorbiaceae
The whole plant, particularly the seeds have insecticidal properties.  
Both the dried powder and oil from the seeds of physic nut are known to be insecticidal. 
The oil has been recorded as having low environmental persistence and non-toxic to 
beneficial insects (Pluke et al. 1999).  Physic nut seed oil reduced the hatching of eggs of the 
sugarcane borer Diatraea saccharalis Fab. (Lepidoptera:Crambidae) (Oliveira et al. 2013). 
Pursley (Portulaca oleracea)
Family: Portulacaceae
Pursley has been reported to contain insecticidal compounds which are toxic to 
diamondback moth (Grainge and Ahmed 1988; Iwu 1993).
Quassia – quassia, bitter ash (Quassia amara)
Family: Simaroubaceae
Contains quassin, a natural insecticide.  
162 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
Boil small pieces of the plant (500 gms) in 10 litres of water and leave undisturbed for 
24 hours.  Filter out the solids before dissolving two kgs of soap in three litres water to the 
solution.  Add more water for a total of 100 litres.  
The bark of bitter ash is known to have insecticidal and nematicidal activity.  Bark extract 
acts as a contact insecticide, a stomach poison and also systemically and hence can be 
applied to plant roots for protection against sucking and chewing insect pests. Aqueous 
extracts applied to plants also deter insects (e.g. sweet potato whitefly B. tabaci) from feeding 
on the treated plant parts Flores et al. (2008). Bitter ash extracts have also been used in 
organic agriculture (Psota et al. 2010). Can be used to control aphids, diamondback moth, 
leafminers, mites and cucumber worms (Tancho 2013).  
Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum)
Family: Solanaceae
Repels insects and inhibits feeding and egg laying.
Grind three gms of fresh tomato leaves and add five litres of water or grind 50 gms of 
fresh leaves and add to two litres of warm/hot water.  Allow to soak for five hours then filter 
with a thin white cloth. Add sticker to mixture such as dishwashing liquid at a rate of one 
tbsp per ten litres water.  Spray every two days in the evening.  
Effective against the flea beetle (Phyllotreta sinuata), stem borers, houseflies, the 
diamondback moth, nematodes, cockroaches and red mites (Tancho 2013).
Vervine (Stachytarpheta jamaicensis)
Family: Verbanaceae
Ethanolic extracts from the leaves of S. jamaicensis had antifeedant effects against the 
fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda in Trinidad (Moustache and Khan, 2012) while 
extracts from the leaves of another species (S. mutabilis) in Guyana exhibited antifeedant 
effects against locusts and armyworms (Pluke et al. 1999).
Wild chataigne (Pachira insignis)
Family: Bombacaceae
Used for trapping the cocoa beetle Steirastoma breve. Branches are cut and placed in 
wire baskets, beetles are attracted to it to lay eggs. Branches are burned every few days and 
new traps set up (Hall 1914).
| 163
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Wild coffee (Cassia occidentalis)
Family: Leguminosae 
Leaves of wild coffee are used as a seed protectant against the cowpea beetle C. 
maculatus (Lienard et al. 1993) and also against termites which can be a serious 
problem in agriculture (Abdullah et al. 2012). Leaf extracts were also toxic to 
mosquito (Aedes aegypti) larvae (Chariandy et al. 1999). 
Box 5.4: Other plants with naturally-occurring insect repellent properties
• Amaranthus, bhaji or callalloo (Amaranthus spp. - stems, flowers and leaves used), 
• Annatto (Bixa oreliana – fruits and roots used), 
• Bougainvillea (Bougainvella glabra – leaves and flowers used), 
• Cashew (Anacardium occidentale – leaves, seeds, seed oil used), 
• Fish bean (Tephrosia spp. – whole plant, leaves, twigs and roots contain rotenone), 
• Goat weed (Ageratum conyzoides – all parts of plant used), 
• Jimson weed (Datura stramonium – whole plant, especially leaves used),
• Oleander (Nerium oleander – all parts of plant used), 
• Onion (Allium cepa – bulb and leaves used), 
• Pyrethrum (Chrysanthemum cinerarieafolium – flowers contain pyrethrum),
• Soyabean (Glycine max – stems used), 
• Sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas – leaves and starch water used), 
• Tamarind (Tamarindus indica – leaves and fruit used), 
• Tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum – leaves and stems contain nicotine).
164 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
CONCLUSION
A combination of local and natural crop protection measures blended with certain 
aspects of modern agriculture is recommended to achieve sustainable agriculture practices. 
In order to ensure the adoption and continuity of some of these ecologically friendly 
practices, researchers, scientists and extension workers must ensure that this knowledge 
is disseminated effectively.  The focus on one or two plant species used as pesticides could 
be expanded since there are diverse plant species that possess pesticidal properties.  This 
will require further validation trials and basic research. To avoid ad hoc application of 
non-chemical pesticides, appropriate testing of materials and ingredients should be done 
to avoid toxicity. This would ensure that the correct amounts are applied to crop and insect 
pests. The effectiveness of each application of pesticide due to its active ingredients on each 
specific type of insect should be tested and documented.  This would result in grading of the 
various formulations according to strength.  Information on non-chemical crop protection 
methods must be reliable and made easily available through workshops, books, journals, 
media and the internet.  The adoption of these indigenous and natural crop protection 
practices should be encouraged and considered a priority in the region in order to curb the 
heavy dependence on synthetic pesticides.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge the research conducted by Ms. Allison Boney, Mrs. 
Christine Robley-Job, Ms. Vanessa Prophet, Mr. Jeremiah Edmund and Dr. Wayne Ganpat. 
Information was collected in Antigua, St. Lucia, Trinidad and Tobago, part of which was 
published in Tropical Agriculture (2014), Vol. 91 (1):58–66. 
REFERENCES
Abdullah, N., S. Yahya, M. Yushau, and Z. Tukur. 2012. Laboratory Evaluation of the Effect 
of Khaya senegalensis and Cassia occidentalis  Ethanolic Leaf Extracts against Worker 
Termites (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae) on Treated Wood Samples. J. Stor. Prod. Postharv. 
Res. 3, no.11:152–55. 
Amoabeng, B.W., G.M. Gurr, C.W. Gitau, H.I. Nicol, L. Munyakazi and P.C. Stevenson. 
2013. Tri-trophic Insecticidal Effects of African Plants against Cabbage Pests. PLoS 8 
(1): e78651.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0078651. 
Anon. (2014). Cymbopogon citratus-lemon Grass. Available from http://www.tropilab.
com/lemon-gras.html 
| 165
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Ayensu, E.S. 1981. Medicinal Plants of the West Indies. USA: Reference Publications Inc.
Chariandy, C.M., C.E. Seaforth, R.H. Phelps, G.V.P. Pollard, and B.P.S. Khambay. 1999. 
Screening of Medicinal Plants from Trinidad and Tobago for Antimicrobial and 
Insecticidal Properties. J. Ethnopharm 64, no. 3:265–70.
Cock, M.J.W., F.D. Bennett, I.W. Hughes, F.J. Simmonds and M. Yaseen. 1985. A Review 
of Biological Control of Pests in the Commonwealth Caribbean and Bermuda up to 
1982. UK: CAB International Publishers.
Darkoh, M.B.K. 2009. Overview of the Environmental Problems of Southern Africa. Afric. 
J. Ecol. 47:1–6.
Fernandez, A., A. Singh and R. Jaffe. 2007. A Literature Review on Trace Metals and 
Organic Compounds of Anthropogenic Origin in the Wider Caribbean Region. Mar. 
Pollut. Bull. 54:1681–691. 
Flores, G., L. Hilje, G.A. Mora and M. Carballo. 2008. Antifeedant Activity of Botanical Crude 
Extracts and Their Fractions on Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera:Aleyrodidae) Adults: III. 
Quassia amara (Simaroubaceae). Rev. Biol. Trop. 56, no. 4:2131–146.
Grainge, M., and S. Ahmed. 1988. Handbook of Plants with Pest-Control Properties. New 
Jersey: Wiley Interscience Publishers. 
Hall, C.J.J. van. 1914. Cocoa. Canada: Macmillan and Company.
Hallette, R.H., N.P. D. Angerilli and J.H. Borden. 1995. Potential for a Sticky Trap Monitoring 
System for the Diamondback Moth (Lepidoptera:Yponomeutidae) on Cabbages in 
Indonesia. Int. J. Pest Manag. 41:205–207.
Hernandez, L., Ramos, P.L., Rodriguez, M., Pena, I. and Pérez, J.M. (2010). First report of 
Pineapple mealybug wilt associated virus-3 infecting pineapple in Cuba. New Disease 
Rep. 22:18. 
Iwu, M.M. 1993. Handbook of African Medicinal plants. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Ketoh, G.K., I.A. Glitho, K.H. Koumaglo and F.X. Garneau. 2000. Evaluation of Essential 
Oils from Six Aromatic Plants in Togo for Callosobruchus maculatus F. pest control. 
Insect Sci. Applic. 20, no. 1:45–49.
Khan, A., and G. Gangapersad. 2001. Comparison of the Effectiveness of Three 
Entomopathogenic Fungi in the Management of the Banana Borer Weevil, Cosmopolites 
sordidus Germar (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Int. Pest Control 43:208–213. 
Khan, A., F.A. Gumbs and A. Persad. 2002. Pesticidal Bioactivity of Ackee (Blighia sapida 
Koenig) against Three Stored Product Insect Pests. Trop. Agric. 79, no. 4:217–23.
Khan, A., and F.A. Gumbs. 2003. Repellent Effect of Ackee (Blighia sapida Koenig) 
Component Fruit Parts against Stored Product Insect Pests. Trop. Agric. 80:19–27.
Korada, R.R., S.K. Naskar, M.S. Palaniswami and R.C. Ray.  2010. Management of Sweet 
Potato Weevil Cylas formicarius (Fab.): An Overview. J. Root Crops 36:14–26.
166 |
Natural Crop Protection Methods in the Caribbean
Lienard, V., D. Seck, G. Lognay, C. Gaspar and M. Severin. 1993. Biological Activity of 
Cassia occidentalis L. against Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) (Coleoptera:Bruchidae). 
J. Stor. Prod. Res. 29, no. 4:311–18.
Matthew, J., and A. Khan. 2013. Growth Kinetics and Pathogenicity of Paecilomyces 
fumosoroseus against Bemisia tabaci Grennadius (Homoptera:Aleyrodidae). J. Biopest. 
6, no. 2:160–64. 
Mootoo, B.S., A. Ali, A.Khan, W.F. Reynolds S. and MacLean. 2000. Three Novel 
Monotetrahydrofuran Annonaceous Acetogenins from Annona montana. J. Nat. Prod. 
63, no. 6:807–811. 
Morton, J.F. 1987. Fruits of Warm Climates. USA: Echo Point Books and Media.
Moustache, R. and Khan, A. 2012. Antifeedant Effects of Stachytarpheta Jamaicensis on 
Spodoptera frugiperda Larvae. Insect Environ 18:10–12. 
Nicholls, C.I., et al. 2002. The Development and Status of Biologically Based Integrated 
Pest Management in Cuba. Integr. Pest Manag. Rev. 7:1–16. 
Obico, J.J.A., and E.M. Ragragio. 2014. A Survey of Plants Used as Repellents against 
Haematophagous Insects by the Atya People of Porac, Pampanga Province Philippines. 
Philipp. Sci. Lett. 7, no. 1:179–86.
Oliveira, H.N. de., A.G. Santana and M.R. Antigo. 2013. Insecticide Activity of Physic Nut 
(Jatropha curcas L.) Oil and Neem (Azadiractha indica A. Juss.) Oil on Eggs of Diatraea 
saccharalis F. (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Arq. Inst. Biol. 80, no. 2:229–32.
Parthasarathy, V.A., B. Chempakam and T.J. Zachariah. 2008. Chemistry of Spices. UK: 
CABI Publishers.
Perales-Segovia, C., H. Bravo-Mojica, J.L. Leyva-Vazquez, A. Martinez-Garza. 1996. 
Sustancias Vegetales Para El Control De Moscas De La Fruta. Agrociencia 30:411–15.
Pluke, R., D. Permaul and G. Leibee. 1999. Integrated Pest Management and the Use of 
Botanicals in Guyana. Guyana: IICA.
Psota, V., J. Ouředníčková and V. Falta. 2010. Control of Hoplocampa testudinea using the 
Extract from Quassia amara in Organic Apple Growing. Hort. Sci. (Prague) 37:139 –44.
Rai, B.K., and A.K. Sinha. 1980. Pineapple: Chemical Control of Mealybug and Associated 
ants in Guyana. J. Econ. Entomol 73, no. 1:41–45. 
Ramlal, S. 2014. Bioactivity of Six Essential Oils against the Maize Weevil Sitophilus zeamais 
Motschulsky (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Master of Science (Crop Protection) Thesis, 
University of the West Indies, St Augustine Trinidad. 
Senanayake, S.G.J.N. 2006. Indigenous Knowledge as a Key to Sustainable Development. 
J. Agric. Sci. 2, no. 1:87–94.
| 167
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Shankar, U., S.V.S. Raju, M.D. Monobrullah and S. Rai. 2007. Efficacy of Intercropping 
as a Management Tool for the Control of Plutella xylostella (L.) On Cabbage. Veg. Sci. 
34, no. 2:208–210.
Sivira, A., M.E. Sanabria, N. Valera and C. Vasquez.  2011. Toxicity of Ethanolic Extracts 
from Lippia origanoides and Gliricidia sepium to Tetranychus cinnabarinus (Boisduval) 
(Acari: Tetranychidae). Neotrop. Entomol. 40, no. 3:375–79. 
Stoll, G. 1988. Natural Crop Protection in the Tropics. Germany: Verlag Josef Margraf 
Publishers.
Sujatha, C.H., V. Vasuki, T. Mariappan, S.M. Kalyana and P.K. Das. 1988. Evaluation of 
plant extracts for biological activity against mosquitoes. Int. Pest Contr. 30:122–24.
Tancho, A. 2013.  Natural Farming: Principles, Concepts and Appropriate Techniques in 
the Tropics.  Thailand: Trio Advertising & Media Co. Ltd.  
Ullman, D.E., D.F. Williams, H. Fleisch, J.S. Hu, D. Sether and A. Gonsalves.  1993. Heat 
Treatment of Pineapple: Subsequent Growth and Occurrence of Mealybug Wilt of 
Pineapple. Acta Hort. 334:407–410. 
Venotola, V. 2013. Integrated Pest Management and Biological Control in Cuba. http://
www.agrowingculture.org/.../integrated-pest-management-and-biological-control-in-
cuba-draft/.
Warburton, H., and A. Martin. 1999.  Local People’s Knowledge in Natural Resources 
Research, Socio-Economic Methodologies for Natural Resources Research. Chatham, 
UK: Natural Resource Institute.
Warren, D.M., L.J. Slikkerveer and D. Brokensha, eds. 1995. The Cultural Dimension of 
Development: Indigenous Knowledge Systems. London: Intermediate Technology 
Publications. UK.   
Wilson, A.B. 1993. Pesticidal Properties of Selected Plant Extracts and Their Formulations. 
Master of Philosophy Thesis, University of the West Indies, Jamaica. 
Wilson, A.B., and A. Mansingh. 2004. Bioactivity of Hexane Extract of Blighia Sapida 
Koenig on the Cattle Tick, Boophilus Microplus and the Sweet Potato Weevil, Cylas 
formicarius elegantulus. In Novel Compounds from Natural Products in the New 
Millennium: Potential and Challenges, ed. B.K.H. Tan, B.H. Bay and Y.Z. Zhu. World 
Scientific Publishing Company Inc. 
168 |
Sustainable Water Management 
Practices for Food Production in 
the Caribbean
Mark N. Wuddivira, Melissa A. Atwell and Gaius D. Eudoxie 
INTRODUCTION
Water is one of the most valuable resources on the planet earth. Three-
fourths of earth’s surface is covered by water, which constitutes 60-70 % of 
the weight of the living world. Water is used for many purposes including 
drinking, domestic and industrial use, and agricultural production. Water also 
determines the density and function of vegetation and biodiversity richness 
in an ecosystem, making it ecohydrologically important.  It is implicated 
in many biogeochemical processes exerting a strong control on microbial 
activity, nitrogen mineralization, and biogeochemical cycling of nitrogen and 
carbon (Robinson et al. 2008). Water is also important for many physical 
and chemical weathering processes on earth and transportation of large 
amounts of sediments. As a fundamental raw material in photosynthesis, it is 
central to acid-base neutrality and enzyme function.  Therefore, the state of 
this resource, with respect to its quality, and availability (i.e. whether there 
is ‘too much’ or ‘too little’), can have economical, biological and ecological 
implications.
In spite of the large volume of water on the planet earth, only three 
percent is fresh water and 0.06 percent easily accessible for human use 
(Ekwue, Dhanraj and Birch 2013). Professor Henry Lin of Pennsylvania 
State University (Schneider 2013) in describing the dwindling nature of this 
important resource, asserted that ‘if a beer barrel – 13 gallons – represents 
all of the water on earth, the total amount of fresh water is just ten drops. 
Not only that, but out of that ten drops, only one-tenth of one drop is surface 
water that we can see and directly access’ (Schneider 2013). With the expected 
increase in the world’s population to nine billion people by the year 2050, 
demand for food will increase. In order to meet the food demand for this 
teeming population, food production will have to increase correspondingly by 
C H A P T E R  SIX
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
about 70 percent (Schneider 2013). Presently, irrigated agriculture which uses 70 percent of 
fresh water produces 40 percent  of the world’s food. With an increasing demand for food, 
coupled with competing demands from industries, urbanization, recreation, continuing 
pollution and climate change, the world’s water resources will become even more strained 
(Schneider 2013).  This situation will have a more precarious impact where land is limited 
as in the case of small island developing states (SIDS) like those of the Caribbean region, 
which are already densely populated, limited in reservoir storage facilities, vulnerable to 
climate change impact, and with agriculture that is estimated to utilize 60–70 percent  of 
the total fresh water resources (Farrell, Nurse and Moseley 2007).
The quality and quantity of available water resources in the Caribbean are already 
being strained. Climate change is having a strong impact on the water resources. Intense 
rainstorm activities have increased over the years resulting in colossal runoff generation 
and flooding problems, causing a decrease in groundwater recharge and aquifer depletion. 
Concomitantly, sea level rise due to climate change has increased the proneness of lowlands 
to flooding and salinization, and saltwater intrusion into coastal aquifers. In addition to 
climate change impacts, population growth and urbanization have put more strain on the 
existing water resources through agricultural chemicals and human waste which pollute both 
aquifers and surface water. There is also the problem of over abstraction, which depletes 
aquifers and changes in land use, which increases runoff and decreases recharge to aquifers. 
Soils in the Caribbean, except in islands with volcanic soils, are mostly medium to heavy 
in texture, with impeded drainage. Most of the soils have a restrictive layer that can easily 
develop a perched water table with attendant waterlogging issues that significantly affect 
plant water relations. The soils can therefore be exposed to prolonged waterlogging and 
high water tables under intense rainfall. This lowers the productive capacity of the land 
for food production. Sustainable water management must therefore address water issues 
related to its scarcity and excess.  
As Caribbean nations seek to attain food security, therefore, adequate water of good quality 
is required to maximise both yield and quality. Consequently, there is heavy reliance on fresh 
water for domestic, agricultural and commercial uses. However, sustainable management 
of water resources has not been given the priority it deserves in many Caribbean islands. 
Unsustainable use of water resources will intensify our water woes leading to food insecurity 
and slows the advancement of the Caribbean region towards meeting poverty and hunger 
reduction targets. The following economic, social and environmental impacts have been 
identified as repercussions for failure to sustainably use and manage our water resources 
(Taylor, Stephenson and Rankine 2011): 
170 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
• Degradation of water quality which accentuates water scarcity
• Overburdening of the sensitive environmental and human systems
• Increasing frequency and risks of soil erosion, coastal erosion, flooding and 
inundation
• Dwindling safety in potable water and other water supplies
• Reduction in subsistence and commercial agricultural production of such crops as 
vegetables, bananas, and coconut with attendant food insecurity issues
• Increasing dry spells and sea level rise, intensifying the risk of saline water intrusion 
into river estuaries and coastal aquifers compromising both the quality of surface 
and groundwater sources
• Increased risk of dengue fever, malaria, cholera, typhoid fever and diarrhoeal 
diseases 
• Increasing human conflicts and sufferings.
Therefore to achieve a sustainable functioning environment and a food secure Caribbean 
region, appropriate and sustainable water management practices must be an integral part 
of the way we use our water resources. Adopting sustainable water management practices 
will assist in alleviating the economic, social and environmental impacts listed above and 
will have far reaching benefits to cope with the myriads of constraints that are inimical to 
achieving food security in the Caribbean region. 
CARIBBEAN CLIMATE AND WEATHER
The Caribbean region is essentially characterized by a humid tropical climate. Rainfall is 
almost bimodal with two distinct seasons; a dry season from January to May and a wet season 
from June to December. The rainy season coincides with the hurricane season of June to 
November, with peak rainfall occurring at the start and end of this season (Cashman, Nurse 
and John 2010). The mean annual rainfall is large and varies from 1127mm in Antigua and 
Barbuda to 4500mm in Dominica (Ekwue et al. 2013). Roughly 20 percent to 25 percent 
of the rainfall received in the Caribbean falls in the dry season, with 75–80 percent  falling 
in the wet season months. The major water management issue in the Caribbean, therefore, 
is really how to cope with excess water in the wet season to ensure adequate supply all-
year round (Ekwue et al. 2013). Even though the Caribbean does not have a steady spatio-
temporal rainfall trend, projections reveal that there will be more pronounced dry days 
and fewer successive wet days, which will become more intense. The annual precipitation, 
| 171
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
however, is not expected to change drastically; day and night time temperatures are however 
expected to increase.
The hydrological cycle inextricably links climate to water resources. It defines water 
transfer from bodies of water to the land for storage. Essentially it involves the movement 
of water from different reservoirs by the physical processes of evaporation, condensation, 
precipitation, infiltration, run-off and sub-surface flow.  The following equations (1 and 2 
respectively) are used to calculate the water balance for ground water and surface water 
respectively:
ΔGW = P − ET − RO + GWi −GWo     (1)
ΔSW = P − ET + SWi – SWo + Gi −Go     (2)
P is precipitation in the form of rain, ET is evapotranspiration, RO is surface water 
runoff, GWi and GWo are groundwater inflows into and groundwater outflows from the 
system respectively and ΔGW represents change in subsurface storage. ΔSW represents the 
change in surface water storage, SWi represents the surface water inflows into the system, 
SWo represents surface water outflows from the system, Gi represents groundwater inflows 
into the system and Go represents outflows from the system to the groundwater system. 
Water resources management is strongly influenced by the water balance equation, which 
in turn is determined by the impact of climate on the hydrological cycle. This is shown by 
the fact that the interactions between the different variables in the water balance equation 
can be very intricate and are largely dependent on climate. For instance, temperature and 
humidity can affect water loss via evaporation and transpiration, while rainfall intensity 
can affect surface run-off. 
Climate and weather have many significant impacts on food production within the 
region. Plant growth and thus yields in the Caribbean are a consequence of the climate 
experienced in the region. Temperature, precipitation, soil moisture availability, humidity, 
radiation intensity, day length and wind all vary with latitude. The atmospheric conditions 
experienced in the region are therefore an expression of our unique location in the world. 
Climate can also have an effect on livestock. Increases in temperature can cause heat stress 
to animals thus reducing productivity, increasing animal diseases and altering the quality of 
food. The increase in invasive species of weeds can also be an effect of climate and weather 
patterns. An increase in temperature and precipitation can favour one species of plant over 
the next causing certain species of weeds to out-compete agricultural crops for limited 
resources thereby reducing crop yield and productivity. Pests and diseases also respond to 
increased temperature and precipitation favourably, something which may influence their 
distribution and development. Humidity and evaporation can also play a role in increasing 
172 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
some pest and disease activity. Most processes that occur in the soil are largely influenced 
by temperature and precipitation and changes in CO2.  These can affect soil development 
and therefore determine its characteristics. 
WATER RESOURCES IN THE CARIBBEAN
‘Water is not a commercial product like any other but, rather, a heritage which must be 
protected, defended and treated as such’ (Water Framework Directive 2000). The total 
amount of water on the earth today is nearly the same as 1000 years ago. However, threats of 
water crisis continue to loom on us. Billions of people lack basic water services, and millions 
die each year from water-related diseases.  This is partly due to the increasing unsustainable 
use of water resources that degrades the quality of easily accessible fresh water converting 
it into forms that require expensive technological treatment for remediation.  
The Caribbean region is endowed with an abundance of water resources (Table 6.1) 
so that the availability of fresh water should currently not be an issue. However, threats 
from population growth, unsustainable agricultural practices, and climate change have 
highlighted the issue of accentuated water insecurity in the Caribbean. Based on Table 6.1, 
the water resources in the Caribbean are adequate to meet the current water demand for 
domestic and industrial purposes, except in the low-lying more arid islands of Barbados, 
Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, and the Virgin Islands, where surface free-flowing water 
is scarce.  The limited data on water resources presented in the FAO Aquastat database 
(FAO 2013) indicate the critical role of rainfall in determining a nation’s water resource 
supply system. For instance, the lack of perennial rivers in the drier Caribbean islands of 
Barbados and Antigua and  Barbuda as a result of mean annual rainfall that is <1500 mm, 
indicate that these islands are water scarce. Here, the recharge of ground water as the sole 
source of water supply by precipitation is critical or else precipitation is lost to the ocean. 
Therefore, the use of surface ponds and reservoirs as storage facilities is important in 
alleviating shortages. Sea water desalination has become an important source of water in 
these islands. Nonetheless, the increased frequency of intense weather conditions, sea level 
rise and population growth, with their associated decrease in ground water recharge, reduced 
water quality due to saline intrusion and pollution, pose a serious threat to the continuous 
supply of water in adequate amounts and quality from these ground water sources. 
Caribbean countries such as Trinidad and Tobago, Dominica and Jamaica on the other 
hand, have mean annual rainfall values of > 2000 mm and a water resource supply that is 
well above the water scarce threshold. These islands have multiple water sources and their 
water withdrawal is below available resources. Increased water withdrawal via irrigated 
agriculture in some countries such as Guyana, 
| 173
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Table 6.1: Water resources in selected Caribbean countries and water supply 
situation
Country Water Supply Situation 
1. The Bahamas In New Providence Island (with 67 percent of the population), water 
supply is from local groundwater and 30 percent of water barged from 
Andros Island, 75 km to the West. All water is from groundwater except 
small supplies from roof catchments and desalination of seawater. New 
Providence alone has a projected demand of 64,500 m3/d in 2000 but 
has only a safe yield of 9100 m3/d from its water sources, a depressing 
serious shortage of water. There are no major surface water sources 
because of the porous nature of the soil and rock. No major irrigation is 
carried out. 
2. Barbados Public water supply is from groundwater reservoirs. Water from well 
sources is either pumped directly to transmission and distribution mains 
or otherwise to 24 service reservoirs varying in capacity from 900 m3 to 
6800 m3. Irrigation water is provided in the public water supply system 
(23 percent). Shortage of water is envisaged in the near future, but 
measures are in place to prevent this. 
3. Belize Public water supply is obtained from 9 rivers, springs and wells. 
Surface water requires the removal of turbidity, tastes and odours 
through sedimentation, filtration and chlorination. The Department 
of Agriculture drills wells for agricultural use in farming communities, 
separate from the public water system. Enough water is available for the 
near future for irrigation and other purposes. 
4. Dominica Abundant rainfall, coupled with steep relief and valleys lead to abundant 
surface water for domestic, industrial and hydro-electricity. Surface 
water is collected in five new reservoirs constructed with welded steel. 
The capacity of developed water sources estimated at 45,500 m3/d, 
greatly exceeds the forecast demand of water up to the year 2005. Not 
enough water for irrigation. 
5. Guyana Public water supply is obtained from groundwater (84 percent) and 
surface water (16 percent). Quality of groundwater is good except 
for the relatively high iron content of 1.5 to 2.5 mg/L in sand aquifers. 
Treatment of surface water is necessary because of the high turbidity, 
colour, odours and tastes caused by decaying organic matter. Only 40 
percent of produced water is treated. Supply is unreliable. 98 per  cent 
of water is used for irrigation. 
174 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
6. Jamaica Public water is from surface (eight percent) and groundwater (92 
percent) scattered in different parishes. An estimated 2,542,465 m3/d 
is withdrawn from developed sources. About 11.2 x 106 m3/d of water 
is still available for further development. The quality of groundwater 
is good requiring only chlorination. Surface water is conventionally 
treated to remove turbidity, tastes, odours and hardness. No problem 
of water scarcity is envisaged in the near future. 74 percent of water use 
is for irrigation. 
7. St. Kitts Both surface water tapped from high elevations and ground aquifers 
(which occur in formations of volcanic origin) are used. There are 16 
distribution reservoirs. Raw water quality of surface and groundwater is 
good. One third of water supply sources are treated by sedimentation, 
rapid sand filtration and chlorination. Developed water supply sources 
with a safe yield of 27,100 m3/d can meet local needs for the next ten to 
15 years. Not enough water for irrigation. 
8. St. Lucia Water supply is drawn from 33 surface water sources, the most recent 
being the Roseau River on which a dam and a storage reservoir have 
been constructed to augment supplies to the Castries area. All supplies 
are disinfected but some require additional treatment through 
coagulation, sedimentation and sand filtration. Turbidity levels of water 
rise because of increased erosion in catchments as a result of removal 
of forest cover. Present water sources are enough for the forecasted 
future demand, but not for irrigation. 
9. Suriname Public water supply is from groundwater extracted from ten well fields 
in three major aquifers. Water is stored in reservoirs. Presence of 
carbon dioxide, iron, ammonia and chlorides from sand aquifers require 
treatment. Principal treatment methods are aeration, sand filtration 
and chlorination. Water is abundant for irrigation and other purposes. 
10. Trinidad and    Water is supplied from surface sources (79 percent) and groundwater 
Tobago (21 percent). A total of 97 sources are involved. Caroni-Arena, Navet, 
Hollis and Oroupouche resources supply 64 percent of total production. 
The first three have earth dams and impounding reservoirs. There are 
76 distribution reservoirs ranging in size from 45,500 m3/d to less than 
45 m3/d. The Desalination Company of Trinidad and Tobago supplies 
109,589 m3/d. The present safe yield of identified water supply sources 
will take care of the projected water demand. More land could be 
brought into irrigation if more water can be exploited. 
Source: Ekwue (2010) 
| 175
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Belize, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago, however, indicate an increased demand on 
water resources. Consequently, shortfalls have been experienced during the dry season. 
Drought episodes were very severe in Trinidad and Tobago among other Caribbean countries 
in 2009 extending to 2010 (ODPM 2013).  To sustain water supply, water for domestic, 
agricultural and alternative uses was regulated. The accompanying ills of the drought 
episode, such as forest fires, incidences of crop failure and flash flooding caused by rainfall 
events following the drought, were severe. Therefore whether too little or too much, the 
demand for water will increase, requiring us to sustainably manage water resources.
Water resources usually take three main forms in the Caribbean region; groundwater, 
surface water (rivers, springs, lakes, and reservoirs), and sea water. Ground and surface 
water are the primary sources used to meet public and industrial demands. Desalinization 
of sea water has, however, become an important supply of potable water to a number 
of Caribbean Islands (Table 6.1). Water resources may vary among islands depending 
on geology and topography. For instance, for the islands of Barbados and Antigua with 
calcareous geology, ground water is the principal natural source of water with desalination 
supplementing these natural sources.
Groundwater constitutes 30 percent of global fresh water stocks, making it by far the 
largest freshwater resource on earth other than water stored as ice. Groundwater resources 
are relatively clean, reliable and a cost-effective resource as a source of drinking water, 
for agricultural irrigation and for maintenance of surface water systems, biodiversity and 
habitats of sensitive ecosystems (Tharme 2003). Groundwater is water located beneath the 
earth’s surface in aquifers. An aquifer is a layer of porous substrate that traps groundwater 
in amounts which can then be available to the population. Groundwater resources are an 
important source of water in the Caribbean, the quantity and quality of which are influenced 
by  a number of factors, including: the location of the aquifer (coastal or inland), whether 
it’s confined or unconfined, the size of the aquifer, the characteristics of the soil around 
the aquifer, the geology, climate change and variability. Caribbean islands, for example 
Barbados depend heavily on groundwater for their national supply (Table 6.1).
Surface water resources in the Caribbean region take the form of rivers, small lakes and 
small impoundments. This water resource is the primary source of potable water in most 
Caribbean countries and is an important component of a nation’s water supply system. 
It is influenced by precipitation, run-off, evaporation and exchanges with the underlying 
groundwater system. Countries such as St. Vincent, St. Lucia, Dominica, and Trinidad and 
Tobago all rely on surface water resources to meet the national demand (Table 6.1).
Saline bodies of water through the process of desalinization contribute to the water 
resources of the Caribbean region. Desalinization is the process where salt and other minerals 
176 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
are removed from saline water. It is considered to be one of the few rainfall independent 
water resources. Salt water is desalinized to produce fresh water for human consumption 
or irrigation. In Trinidad and Tobago, desalination plants are used to provide fresh water 
suitable for industrial use as a good alternative of supplementing the country’s supply of 
fresh water leaving more naturally-occurring water for domestic purposes. 
Role of soil water
Soil water is the amount of water that is stored in the soil from rainfall after losses via 
evapotranspiration, runoff and deep drainage. Soil water is an important water resource 
particularly because of its role in the ecosystem, the hydrological cycle and in modulating 
other critical elements of the hydrological cycle. Ecohydrologically, soil water is a vital 
ecosystem resource that provides the transpiration water needs of plants. It controls the 
structure and function of vegetation, and diversity in ecosystems. In spite of its overall 
small amount (~0.05 percent) in the global hydrological cycle, it plays the vital function 
of regulating the global energy balance and the distribution of precipitation. Soil water 
governs microbial activity affecting vital biogeochemical processes such as nitrification and 
CO2 production via respiration (Robinson et al. 2008). 
Soil water is important in determining the profile storage for determining antecedent 
conditions, thereby controlling rainfall-runoff response in systems where saturation excess 
runoff dominates (Robinson et al. 2008).  Soil water performs a critical hydrological role 
in an ecosystem by controlling infiltration and water recharge to aquifers. By influencing 
infiltration, runoff generation, evaporation and exchanges with the underlying groundwater 
system, it determines the quantity and quality of both surface and groundwater.
 Soil water can be expressed as the soil water content (equation 3) on a mass (gravimetric 
water content) or volume basis (volumetric water content). 
• Gravimetric water content (θg) is the ratio of the mass of water (Mw) relative 
to the dry mass of soil (Ms): 
	 θg = Mw / Ms        (3)
 or, volume basis (volumetric water content)
• Volumetric water content (θv) is the ratio of the volume of water (Vw) relative 
to the total volume of soil (Vt): 
	 θv = Vw / Vt        (3)
 Vt = Va+Vw+Vs; Vt = Vf+Vs since Vf = Va+Vw, indicating that air and water in the soil 
occupy the soil pores.
| 177
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Where Va is the volume of air, Vs is the volume of solid particles and Vf is the volume of 
pores.
To fully characterise soil water, however, the amount of water in the soil (soil water 
content) and the matric potential (the force by which water is held in the soil matrix) are 
key factors. Both matric potential and soil water content are related to each other via a 
function referred to as the soil water characteristic. The status of soil water determined by 
soil water content and matric potential affect among other things the water available for 
plant use, rate of exchange between liquid and gaseous phases, the hydraulic conductivity 
in the soil and exchange between the soil water and groundwater. 
Available soil water is used by plant for growth and development. Under drought 
conditions there is less available water for plants, which results in reduced productivity. 
Under intense rainfall, soils may become waterlogged resulting in transient low aeration. 
Also soil aggregates are degraded resulting in high runoff generation and erosion reducing 
the productivity of agricultural crops (Wuddivira, Ekwue and Stone 2010). Consequently, soil 
and water management practices are required to maintain this pool of water for sustainable 
food production in the Caribbean. 
VULNERABILITY OF THE REGION TO WATER PROBLEMS
The Caribbean region is extremely vulnerable to water scarcity. Too much or too little 
rainfall can pose a serious effect on surface and ground water resources in the region. 
Increased rainfall intensity can result in increased surface runoff reducing recharge into 
aquifers, while, a reduced rainfall amount coupled with increased temperatures and 
evapotranspiration rates reduces soil moisture, infiltration and aquifer recharge. It has been 
shown that in the tropics, approximately 90 percentof net radiation produces evaporation 
over the oceans (Budyko  1974). Net radiation over the continents heats the surface driving 
evaporation of water from surfaces of water bodies, soil surfaces and providing energy 
to plants to remove water from soils. Inconsistent rainfall patterns coupled with high 
evapotranspiration rates create a water deficit within the region. This occurs especially 
during the dry season. 
With the expected impacts of climate change, decreases in crop yields are anticipated with 
reductions in surface water causing less water to become available for irrigation. Prolonged 
high temperatures can also cause cracking in heavy clay soils which can also cause soil loss. 
Higher ocean levels will lead to salt water intrusion in groundwater supplies, threatening 
the quality and quantity of freshwater access to large populations. Saline water intrusion 
percolating through underground channels can affect the quality of fresh water in aquifers. 
178 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
Saline water intrusion usually occurs as a result of sea level rise, which is a consequence 
of climate change and can be devastating to a country’s economy, as a substantial portion 
of most islands’ economic activity occurs a few kilometres inland. Saline water intrusion 
is already a problem in many countries including small islands in the Pacific and Indian 
Oceans and the Caribbean Sea.
Increased rainfall intensity and poor irrigation practices which characterize the Caribbean 
region can also cause excess water to accumulate in the root zone, causing waterlogging 
damage and a decline in the vigour and productivity of crops. This often occurs in soils with 
poor natural drainage caused by restricted layers beneath the root zone. Additionally, soils 
found in low elevations and flat landscapes are prone to excess water accumulation in the root 
zone. Therefore, effective water management should include the drainage of the excess soil 
water from the root zone in poorly drained soils and using appropriate water conservation 
measures to protect water resources from pollution and loss of water from the root zone.
SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN THE 
CARIBBEAN
 Water is one of life’s most valuable resources. As such, responsible and efficient 
water management practices are mandatory to alleviate the increasing pressures on our 
water resources. One significant way to reduce the threats that water insecurity presents 
in the Caribbean is through an integrated water management plan. This plan involves 
differentiating water into different shades (blue, green and grey) and ranking its importance 
for human use. Proper management that involves the use of blue, green and grey water can 
improve water security in the region. As we look for new ways of preserving water for future 
generations, these three categories of water when used in an integrated management plan 
can lower energy costs, recycle nutrients and increase water security.  They are: 
i. Blue water: refers to surface and groundwater in lakes, rivers, reservoirs and 
aquifers. In terms of importance to humans, blue water is the most vital for drinking 
purposes, water for homes and businesses and for irrigation. Agricultural irrigation 
uses 70 percent of the blue water in the world. In the Caribbean, the primary 
source of blue water is precipitation which feeds all sources of ground and surface 
water resources. An increasing demand for food results in a heavy dependence on 
blue water. This situation is further worsened by over-abstraction and increased 
discharge of pollutants into groundwater and surface water resources thereby 
decreasing the fresh water quality and quantity in the region’s watersheds and 
coastal zones. Urban expansion that results in paving of the ground surface also 
| 179
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
affects the recharge of blue water and replenishment of ground water supplies.
Pollution degrades the quality of surface and groundwater resources and climate 
change in the form of flash floods or droughts can also threaten both water and 
food security within the region. Water management that is sustainable must 
therefore employ practices that increase the storage of blue water, protect blue 
water from pollutants, increase groundwater recharge and increase water security 
by integrating green and grey water resources into the water supply chain. Some 
of the practices are discussed below.
ii. Green water: this is the water available in the soil for plants and soil micro-
organisms. 90 percent of the water used by plants is green water. Green 
water sustains terrestrial ecosystems. Through the processes of transpiration, 
evaporation and surface run-off, green water is lost. Green water, however, is only 
considered productive for plants when it increases plant growth and crop yield. 
While only 15–30 percent of water is used for transpiration, a greater amount is 
lost (30–50 percent) via evaporation and 10–25 percent as run-off. Sustainable 
water management to prevent green water loss must therefore include soil and 
water conservation practices. Increasing plant water use efficiency can also help 
reduce water loss by increasing the productive use of green water, decreasing 
evaporation and increasing the rate of transpiration. By better utilizing available 
water, resources can be secured for increased crop production thereby reducing the 
strain on blue water. Sustainable soil water conservation practices that minimize 
soil water loss are discussed in the following section. 
iii. Grey water: can be described as treated wastewater and may contain impurities. 
It is used mainly for cities, households and industries. Waste water is largely 
produced by households and industries. The amount of waste water increases as 
the population grows; according to United States Environmental Protection Agency 
(USEPA), in 2025 wastewater inflows can amount to 52 trillion gallons per day 
(Schneider 2013). The use of grey water saves blue water and creates more green 
water for plants as well as providing other benefits such as nutrient recycling. 
Great care, however, is needed when using grey water to avoid salinization or other 
environmental problems. Permits regulating the use of grey water are therefore 
necessary to avoid environmental degradation. Sustainable practices will involve 
encouraging household water conservation by using grey water for washing, 
bathing, to water gardens and for livestock purposes.
180 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
Rainwater harvesting and storage
Harvesting and storage of rainwater is an important practice which ensures water security 
particularly in the Caribbean region where there is an abundance of rainfall but concentrated 
between June to December. Rainwater harvesting can be described as the accumulation 
and deposition of rainwater before it reaches aquifers or other forms of ground and surface 
storage. Some of its uses within the Caribbean generally include water for plants, livestock, 
irrigation, drinking water. Efficient harvesting and storage of rainwater is a sustainable water 
management practice that provides an independent water supply that often supplements 
the main supply. This practice should be promoted in the Caribbean to augment existing 
supplies. The advantages of rain water harvesting is that it can provide water during periods 
of dry spells, reduce flooding in low lying areas, replenish groundwater and surface water 
storage, and is an excellent source of uncontaminated water that does not contain fluoride, 
chlorine or dissolved salts, minerals and chemicals (CEHI 2009). 
Within the Caribbean, rainwater harvesting is mostly done through the roof catchment, 
where the size of the roof and tank must be large enough to maintain adequate flow and 
storage. The size of the rainwater system is usually set up to meet the individual farmer’s 
demand or household demand throughout the dry season. Apart from rooftop harvesting, 
the use of contour bunding, gully plugging, and check dams and dykes to catch rainwater 
can also be efficient ways of sustainable water management.  In many of the drier Caribbean 
islands such as the Grenadines, the Virgin Islands and the Bahamas, with annual rainfall 
of <1500 mm, free-flowing water is scarce. As a result rain water harvesting remains the 
main source to meet water needs.  Due to seasonality of rainfall, rainwater harvesting is 
also an attractive low-cost option to meet shortfalls in water supplies during dry months 
even in the wetter islands (i.e. >2500 mm per annum of rainfall).  CEHI (2009) provides a 
comprehensive overview of typical rainwater harvesting systems found in the Caribbean. 
According to CEHI (2009) the typical rain harvesting system comprises four main parts:1
1. Other relevant websites on rainwater harvesting include:  http://www.chennaimetrowater.com/
rainwatermain.htm (Chennai Metro Water – Rainwater Harvesting); http://www.rainwater-toolkit.net/
index.php?id=75 (eToolkit on Rainwater Harvesting); http://www.eng.warwick.ac.uk/ircsa/ (International 
Rainwater Catchment Systems Association); http://www.rainharvesting.com.au/rain_water_harvesting.
asp (Rainwater Harvesting); http://www.rainwaterharvesting.org/ (Rainwaterharvesting.org); http://
www.searnet.org/searnetfinal/home.asp (SearNet – Southern and East Africa Rainwater Network); http://
www.tideindia (Technology Informatics Design Endeavour); org/products/06polyhouse.html (example of 
RWH for agricultural greenhouse); http://www.gdrc.org/uem/water/rainwater/rain-web.html (The Web of 
Rain - Online resources on rainwater harvesting); http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_
query=rainwater+harvesting (YouTube videos on rainwater harvesting).
| 181
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
• Catchment area: usually a roof surface or pavement with applications that can range 
from agricultural or commercial uses with large water requirements. 
• Conveyance system: this is a network of guttering and pipes to transfer the rainwater 
from the catchment to the storage tank.
• Storage device: This is usually a tank situated above, underneath or partially below 
the ground.
• Distribution system: this ranges from a simple container to extract the water from 
the storage tank, or a pipe functioning solely as an outlet or a complex network of 
pipes serving multiple users. The distribution of the water can be assisted by using 
a pump.
Re-cycling of drainage water
Recycling of drainage water can be described as the storing of run-off water from 
agricultural farms and after heavy rainfall for reuse as irrigated water into these farms. 
The water collected passes through a controlled irrigation system. This system requires a 
suitable area for the collection and storage of run-off and rain water. The advantages of 
this system are that it returns nutrients to the soil, a positive economic benefit, and it also 
supplements the use of fresh water, which is becoming more limited. Care must be taken 
to ensure that the quality of drainage water is good enough to prevent contamination of 
the soil and ground water supplies.
Use of effluent and wastewater
The use of effluent and wastewater can be described as the recycling of water previously 
used by industries and households. This water includes sewage effluent, storm water runoff, 
and industrial discharges (OAS 1997).  Water recycling has created a new and reliable source 
of water without compromising environmental, public health or agricultural resources. 
The advantages of using recycled water are that it provides an additional source of water, it 
reduces the diversion of water from river and wetland ecosystems, it decreases wastewater 
discharge into waterways and it can be used as irrigation water for agriculture. Effluent 
and waste water must be treated adequately to ensure water quality is appropriate for the 
intended purpose. Effluent can pose environmental, public health or agricultural resource 
risks if not managed appropriately.  Urbanization and industrial development have led to 
the production of large amounts of wastewater in the Caribbean. The integration of this 
grey water into the water supply chain will help alleviate the water woes of the Caribbean. 
Countries around the world have included treated wastewater to supplement their water 
182 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
supply particularly for agricultural and industrial purposes. Although in some countries 
wastewater has been treated to drinking standards, public health, religious and cultural 
concerns among consumers poses a hindrance to this use of wastewater. 
Essentially in the Caribbean, wastewater reuse has been restricted to irrigation and 
industrial applications. Wastewater treatment effluent in Jamaica has been used for golf 
course irrigation, in some hotels and for the industry, as in the case of extensive recycling 
in the bauxite/alumina companies. In Barbados and Curaçao, extended aeration sewage 
treatment plants supplies water for lawn irrigation and hotel use. Large-scale wastewater 
treatment plants in Trinidad and Tobago have been used to treat wastewater to industrial 
standard for industrial use. For instance, the severe drought in 2009/2010 in Trinidad and 
Tobago left the Water and Sewage Authority (WASA) with no option but to significantly 
reduce supply to industries to meet the need for domestic use. As a result treatment plants 
like the Beetham Wastewater Treatment Plant have been used to supply water to the Point 
Lisas Industrial Estate, Trinidad. Also in Trinidad, river water fed by wastewater treatment 
plants is actively used by farmers to irrigate crops in areas like Caroni (Central Trinidad) 
and Maloney (East Trinidad). However, in order to expand the irrigated acreage to attain 
food security, large-scale treatment plants must treat grey water to agricultural standards 
in Trinidad. 
Water conservation systems
Water conservation systems are necessary tools in light of a growing population and 
changing climate. These systems are essential for the Caribbean region to ensure viability 
of its agricultural sector. Water conservation systems involve the preparation of fields for 
efficient water use, for example, conservation tillage, scheduling irrigation and efficient 
irrigation systems such as drip irrigation. The advantages of water conservation systems 
are that they help to preserve the quality of water, reduce or eliminate drainage problems, 
conserve energy, increase food production and save money.
Increasing irrigation efficiency
One of the ways to ensure sustainable water management is to increase the efficiency of 
irrigation systems. Irrigated agriculture uses 60–70 percent of fresh water resources globally. 
With population growth, competing demands and climate change impacts, available water 
resources will become scarcer, therefore more emphasis must be given to efficient use of 
irrigation water for maximum economic return and water resources sustainability. Irrigation 
efficiency requires that appropriate methods of measuring and evaluating how effectively 
water extracted from a water source is used in crop production. It avoids crop water stress 
| 183
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
and yield reduction from inadequate irrigation application and also the pollution of water 
sources from the loss of plant nutrients through leaching, runoff, and soil erosion due to 
excess irrigation application. 
Increasing irrigation efficiency helps to get ‘more crop per drop of water’ (Kranz 2013). 
Surface irrigation which constitutes about 90 percent of irrigated agriculture is poorly 
controlled and does not result in uniform distribution of water to the field, leading to heavy 
water wastage. Pressurized irrigation facilities that ensure uniform distribution of water in 
the field, result in less wastage. Drip (micro) irrigation is highly efficient, as almost every 
drop of water from the source can reach the root system with minimum water losses. Drip 
irrigation is the process whereby small amounts of water are frequently dripped onto the soil 
area surrounding the plant roots through tubing with built in emitters. This system allows 
for a carefully managed amount of water to be applied, thereby avoiding deep percolation 
and run-off. The advantages of drip irrigation is that it reduces salt build up, plant stress, 
farm operations and maintenance costs, increases crop yield and enables efficient water 
use on steep slopes. 
Enhanced surface water storage
Enhanced surface water storage within the Caribbean usually takes the form of damming 
and water catchment. Examples of where this was successful are the Roseau Dam in St 
Lucia, which is also the last relatively large water catchment project in the Caribbean. 
Enhancing the surface water catchment does not only take into consideration its size but 
also the number of water catchment facilities that are able to improve the water quality 
supply of the country. Recently, the Government of Trinidad and Tobago constructed over 
three hundred (300) on-farm irrigation rain-fed ponds to serve as an incentive to increase 
irrigated acreage and encourage agricultural production to meet the food needs of the nation. 
Salt water intrusion control techniques
Saline water intrusion into fresh surface water and groundwater systems can decrease 
the quality of fresh water resources for drinking and agriculture. It can also increase the 
area of marginal unsuitable lands for agriculture. Therefore, measures to curb saline water 
intrusion can result in sustainable supply of fresh water from surface and groundwater 
sources, and can sustain the agricultural productivity of wetlands.  In the Caribbean, sluice 
gates have been used to regulate the flow of salt water at high tides into river channels and 
adjoining wetlands, thereby protecting the sensitive wetland ecosystem and surface and 
groundwater resources. Sluice gates efficiently drain upstream lands, preventing saline water 
intrusion and back flooding during high tides. The use of sluice gates therefore prevents 
the conversion of fresh water systems into saline/brackish systems.
184 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
Soil water conservation techniques
Soil and water conservation methods help in increasing the amount of green water for 
crop production and ecosystem diversity and protect surface and groundwater resources 
from pollution hazards. Some soil and water conservation practices that are relevant to 
sustainable water management in the Caribbean are already discussed elsewhere (Wuddivira 
and Atwell 2012). Soil conservation practices include:
i. Cover cropping: an effective method of soil and water conservation, which 
decreases water loss from the soil surface and increases the quantity and quality 
of green water. Cover crops protect the soil from the elements of soil erosion and 
evaporation. They therefore prevent soil erosion and runoff and encourage water to 
soak into the soil instead of running off the surface. Cover crops also increase soil 
organic matter content which improves and maintains soil fertility, conservation 
of soil moisture and soil structural stability. Cover crops capture, recycle and 
promote nutrients in the soil profile, suppress weeds and improve soil quality and 
thus greatly influence water storage and use.
ii. Conservational tillage: a soil and water conservation system that promotes reduced 
frequency of tillage and the retention of crop residue at, or near the soil surface. 
This practice significantly alleviates soil susceptibility to erosion under intense 
rainfall. Crop residues retained at or near the soil surface usually dissipate raindrop 
energy by providing surface protection against the direct impact of the raindrops. 
This minimizes aggregate breakdown and surface sealing and retards surface water 
flow, thus providing more time for infiltration into the soil.
iii. Mulching: soil and water conservation are achieved by using or applying a layer 
of plant residues or other suitable material on the soil surface. Instead of leaving 
the soil in between crop stands unprotected; residues are applied as mulch on 
the soil surface to enhance soil water infiltration and storage. This is achieved 
by stabilizing the soil temperature and moisture, and preventing sunlight from 
germinating weed seeds. Mulches also warm the soil by helping it retain heat 
that is lost during the night, and additionally minimise the effect of soil erosion, 
runoff, aggregate slaking forces and raindrop impact by improving soil structure. 
Mulching protects the soil surface from direct impact of weather elements such as 
the sun thereby reducing evaporation. In an environment like ours, characterised 
by intense and energetic rainfall, a layer of residue on the soil surface acts as an 
“impact absorber”, reducing direct hitting of the soil by raindrops. Mulches also 
modify temperature and moisture regimes thereby increasing the activity of soil 
fauna and flora, and suppressing weed growth. 
| 185
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
iv. Crop rotation: under a continuous cropping management system, soil and water 
conservation are achieved by growing crops in a planned sequence on the same 
field. This planned sequence of growing crops is referred to as crop rotation. A 
crop rotation system that includes the rotation of annual crops with grasses and 
legumes, improves soil structure, reduces erosion and increases soil fertility. The 
benefits of crop rotation include the improvement of soil structural stability, the 
reduction of erosion, improvement and maintenance of soil fertility, reduction of 
the build-up of pests, reduction of the risk of weather damage and reduction in 
the reliance on agricultural chemicals. These promote green water storage and the 
quality of surface and groundwater resources.
v. Conservation vegetative barriers: the use of vegetative barriers as a soil and water 
conservation practice involves planting strips of rigid, dense vegetation mostly 
of bunchgrass and shrubs on the contour. Vegetative barriers drastically reduce 
runoff velocity and thus prevent potential pollutants from running off into surface 
waters. In addition, vegetative barriers control overland water flow, trap sediments 
and reduce pollution in the surrounding environments.
vi. Contour farming: this is a good conservation practice for water management 
on sloping lands. It involves carrying out farming practices such as ploughing, 
ridging, planting, cultivating, fertilizer application and harvesting across the slope 
rather than along the slope. The contour farming practice slows down runoff and 
increases the detention time of water on the slope, thereby allowing more water 
to soak (infiltrate) into the soil. When more water infiltrates, sheet and rill erosion 
are reduced. Reduction in erosion means reduction in the transport of sediments, 
other solids and associated contaminants to the surrounding environment. 
Therefore, contour farming conserves soil, water and ensures the preservation of 
environmental quality. 
Policies and legislations 
Many sectors in the Caribbean are affected by water scarcity. Inappropriate water 
management practices, climate change and climate variability impacts, increase rates 
of abstraction, pollution from agro-chemicals and other contaminants, inefficient and 
inadequate water storage facilities, failure to exploit recycling technologies and implement 
water-use efficiency measures all compound water scarcity problem of the region (Farrell et 
al. 2007). This will go unabated unless by-laws are put in place to deal with water wastage 
and discharge of pollutants into water bodies.
186 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
Currently, policies and legislation for water management are either inadequate or 
non-existent in the Caribbean. However, legislation is in place in countries like Antigua 
and Barbuda and Barbados for compulsory rainwater harvesting and storage from new 
buildings with large floor size (Ekwue 2010). Trinidad and Tobago has developed ad-hoc 
laws to legislate on water use in times of scarcity during unusually long dry spells. Urgent 
legislation is however required in the Caribbean to protect water resources from misuse 
and pollutant discharge.2
Public enlightenment and education
To achieve sustainable water management in the Caribbean public education on water 
conservation is essential. Strategies on how to save water from wastage and protect 
degradation of water quality can be incorporated into posters, leaflets, print and electronic 
media for the public to read and adopt. Information on proper and efficient irrigation 
systems, frequency of watering and mulching will go a long way in empowering the public 
to use water sustainably.
Excess water (waterlogging) management
In the Caribbean, there is a preponderance of poorly-drained soils due to heavy clay 
textures, low elevation, flat landscape, and the presence of a restrictive layer beneath the 
root zone. With above-average sea-surface temperatures, rainy seasons are expected to be 
wetter, with waterlogging problems hampering food production. Waterlogging interrupts 
seeding and germination, increased incidences of crop diseases and increased cost of tillage 
implements and production. Under waterlogging conditions, farmers must plant crops on 
raised beds to create a zone of unsaturated soil volume for optimal root growth. This will 
reduce the harmful effects of waterlogging on crop productivity. Effective water management 
is also required for profitable crop production, and should include the drainage of the excess 
soil water from the root zone in these poorly drained soils. Therefore, fields that are prone 
to water settling will benefit from drains that are dug to move excess water to lower lying 
areas away from the root zone. Drainage removes excess water and improves the supply 
of oxygen at the root zone for beneficial microbial activities as well as plant roots growth 
(Boman and Tucker 2012).
In fields with restrictive layers and those prone to waterlogging, the water table level 
should be monitored to maintain it at an optimal zone for crop production (Boman and 
Tucker 2012). There are many devices for monitoring the water table ranging from a 
2. Note: there is water quality legislation in some islands.
| 187
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
ruler to electronic sensors. The selection of which device to use should be guided by the 
level of accuracy required. To deal with waterlogging problems, surface and subsurface 
drainage will be required in the poorly-drained soils of the Caribbean. Drainage systems 
to be employed should consist of canals, retention areas, detention areas, open ditches, 
subsurface drains, beds, water furrows, swales, and pumps to remove the excess water. For 
the drainage systems to remain effective, proper maintenance must be employed to ensure 
that the prolonged exposure of roots to waterlogged soils under intense tropical rainfall 
is avoided. For successful productivity of poorly drained soils, the design of the drainage 
systems should be such that it permits a daily drop of the water table to between 10 and 15 
cm (Boman and Tucker 2012). This will create an optimal zone of unsaturated soil volume 
sufficient to prevent root damage. 
To successfully surmount bad drainage, effective land reclamation, design and installation 
of adequate water management systems, effective drainage and irrigation systems as well 
as land layouts that use cambered beds is necessary. The beds can vary in width from 3m 
to 20m, depending upon the crops to be grown (Ahmad 2011). Ridges that are individually 
used or constructed on top of already cambered beds are also important to overcome 
waterlogging problems. These practices have proved successful in those cultural production 
systems involving sugarcane, in Caribbean countries like Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago. 
Also growing of crops that are tolerant to poor soil aeration such as dasheen (Colocasia 
esculenta) is an important practice.
Sustainable water management practices in livestock 
production
Livestock production is a vital agriculture sub-sector in the Caribbean. Production and 
consumption of animal products increases at about 2.5–4 percent per year in developing 
countries, and 0.5 percent per year in developed ones. Livestock production systems 
sustain the lives of four billion people globally, of which 32 percent are poor and 13 percent 
poor livestock keepers. Livestock production systems are heavily reliant on water for feed 
production, general maintenance and the production of animal products. It has been 
estimated that one litre of milk requires 3,000 litres of water (Times of India 2004), while 
producing one kilogram of grain fed beef requires about 100,000 litres of water (Pimental 
2000). Compared to the production of potatoes, which only uses 500 litres, it takes much 
more water to produce animal products than crops. As a result, the sustainable utilization 
of water within the livestock industry is necessary in the face of uncertain water sources 
and variable weather patterns. Some sustainable water management practices that will be 
beneficial in the Caribbean include:
188 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
• Feed sourcing and management: involving the utilisation of feeds with a low water 
cost of production. The effective use of food-feed crops decreases the water cost 
of production. For example, crop residues for livestock feeding and importation of 
feed places no additional demand for water.
• Production-enhancing strategies such as veterinary care, provision of appropriate 
nutrients and a stress free environment limits the need to use water on sick or 
dying animals and increases livestock water productivity. By using these strategies 
one can maximise the benefits derived from animal production per unit volume of 
water depleted.
• Water conserving strategies help to shift evaporation to transpiration, by the 
implementation of better pasture management in the form of sustainable stocking 
rates, rehabilitation of degraded areas, replenishing soil fertility and maintaining 
a critical mass of live biomass. These help to increase livestock water production 
by fostering higher transpiration rates, encouraging infiltration of rainwater and 
reducing water contamination by sediments and zoonotic pathogens.
• Spatial and temporal distribution of livestock, drinking water and feed resources will 
improve livestock water productivity. Low to moderate livestock stocking densities 
and rotational grazing decrease cumulative grazing pressure, soil compaction and 
decrease the risk of damage to vegetation. Animal movements should be adapted 
and supplementary feeders and supply of drinking water for livestock should be 
positioned accordingly to avoid excessive soil compaction. This will reduce soil 
erosion, runoff volumes and evaporation improving soil water retention and 
reducing environmental pollution.
• Protection of water courses: livestock should be prevented from direct access 
to surface water at any time. Water courses should be fenced off in fields away 
from livestock. Grazing of environmentally sensitive areas as well as areas with 
concentrated livestock wastes should be properly managed. Areas where waste 
is collected should not be on permeable soils to avoid nitrate and bacterial 
contamination from leaching into the ground or surface water. Waste collection 
areas should be located further than 30 m away from waterways and streams and 
should be regularly cleaned. 
• Minimising and reducing water spillage and contamination: when rearing livestock 
intensively, a formal wastewater management plan should be put in place to prevent 
potential sources of water pollution in storage areas. The installation of stock 
drinkers for livestock is also important to avoid water spillage. 
| 189
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
• Promoting water use efficiency and reusing water whenever possible:  water supply 
systems should be monitored using metering to allow for the rapid identification of 
inefficiencies in the water system. Breakages (e.g. in troughs or pipes) and leaks in 
livestock areas should be mended, and potential areas where water can be reused, 
sought. For example clean rainwater can be channelled and collected from roofs 
for livestock drinking, if there is no health risk. 
• Minimise water wastage by animals: consider alternative drinking water designs 
such as troughs, nipple and cup or bite-type drinkers in bowls as these can reduce 
the amount of water wasted by animals.  
CONCLUSION
In a changing Caribbean region with mounting demographic pressures and growing 
threats of water quality degradation, improving the security and resilience of water is 
vital for the provisioning of good quality water for drinking and agricultural production. 
Although endowed with an abundance of water resources, the year-round supply of fresh 
water remains an enormous challenge in the Caribbean. This challenge is worsened by 
strong competing sectoral demands. Over abstraction and increased pollution of fresh 
water resources decreases water quality and can exacerbate the scarcity of fresh, easily 
accessible water. While using our water resources, practices that ensure its continuous 
supply in adequate and safe amounts to meet the needs of the population for drinking and 
food production must be adopted. 
The adoption of appropriate sustainable water management strategies as suggested 
above is of paramount importance to meet the water needs and to ensure a water and food 
secure region. The realities of water quality degradation, increased frequency of extreme 
rainfall patterns, and dry spells are looming. To have a region that is water and food secure, 
coping with these threats will involve reducing our regional water footprints through these 
sustainable water management practices and other suitable treatments that protect our water 
resources and increase the quality and availability of surface and groundwater resources.  
190 |
Sustainable Water Management Practices for Food Production in the Caribbean
REFERENCES
Ahmad, N. 2011. Soils of the Caribbean. Kingston: Ian Randle Publishers.
Boman, B. J., and D.P.H. Tucker. 2012. Drainage Systems for Flatwoods Citrus in Florida. 
Circular 1412.  A series of the Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, 
Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. 
Florida: University of Florida. 
Budyko, M.I. 1974. Climate and Life. New York: Academic Press.
Cashman, A., L. Nurse and C. John. 2010. Climate Change in the Caribbean: The Water 
Management Implications. The Journal of Environment and Development 19:42–67.
Caribbean Environmental Health Institute (CEHI). 2009. Rainwater Catch It While You 
Can: A Handbook on Rainwater Harvesting in the Caribbean. http://www.caribank.org/
uploads/2013/08/em-rainwater-handbook-caribbean.pdf.  Accessed March 12, 2014. 
Ekwue, E.I. 2010. Management of Water Demand in the Caribbean Region: Current Practices 
and Future Needs. West Indian Journal of Engineering 32:28–35.
Ekwue, E.I., V. Dhanraj and R.A. Birch. 2013. A Simple Potable Water Treatment Plant 
in Rural Areas. Journal of the Association of Professional Engineers of Trinidad and 
Tobago 41: 29–34. 
Farrrell, D., L. Nurse and L. Moseley. 2007. Managing Water Resources in the Face of 
Climate Change: A Caribbean Perspective. Cave Hill Campus, Barbados: UWI.
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO). 2013. Aquastat database. 
http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/index.html?lang=en. Accessed 
March 12, 2014.
Kranz, B. 2013. More Crop per Drop of Water. The International Journal of Rural 
Development 41.
Office Disaster Preparedness and Management (ODPM). 2013. Drought. http://www.odpm.
gov.tt/node/20. Accessed March 12, 2014.
Organisation of American States (OAS). 1997. Wastewater Re-Use. In Source Book of 
Alternative Technologies for Freshwater Augmentation in Latin America and the 
Caribbean. Washington, DC: Unit of Sustainable Development and Environment 
General Secretariat, Organization of American States.  https://www.oas.org/dsd/
publications/Unit/oea59e/ch26.htm#TopOfPage. Accessed March 12, 2014.
Pimentel, D. 2000. Agriculture, Food, Population, Natural Resources and Ecological 
Integrity. In Implementing Ecological Integrity Restoring Regional and Global 
Environmental and Human Health, ed. P. Crabbè et al. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Robinson, D.A., C.S. Campbell, J.W. Hopmans, B.K. Hornbuckle, S.B. Jones, R. Knight, F. 
Ogden, J. Selker and O. Wendroth. 2008. Soil Moisture Measurement For Ecological 
| 191
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
And Hydrological Watershed-Scale Observatories: A Review. Vadose Zone Journal 
7:358–89.
Schneider, C. 2013. Three Shades of Water: Increasing Water Security with Blue, Green, 
and Grey Water. Crops, Soils, Agronomy (CSA) News Magazine 58, no. 10:4–9. 
Taylor, M., Stephenson, K.A and Rankine, D. 2011. Climate Variability and Change and 
Water Availability in the Caribbean. Paper prepared by the Climate Studies Group, 
Department of Physics, the University of the West Indies.  Mona, Jamaica: University 
of the West Indies. 
Tharme, R.E. 2003. A Global Perspective on Environmental Flow Assessment: Emerging 
Trends in the Development and Application of Environmental Flow Methodologies for 
Rivers. River Res. Appl., 19:397–441. 
Times of India. 2004. Holy Cow! Milk’s a Groundwater Guzzler. Times of India Online. 
June 3. 
Water Framework Directive. 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and 
of The Council of October 23, 2000, Establishing a Framework for Community Action 
in the Field of Water Policy. Official	Journal	L., 327:0001-0073.
Wuddivira, M.N., E.I. Ekwue and R.J. Stone. 2010. Modelling Slaking Sensitivity to Assess 
Degradation of Humid Tropic Soils under Intense Rainfall. Land Degradation and 
Development Journal 21:61–73.
Wuddivira, M.N., and M. Atwell. 2012. Appropriate Soil Conservation Practices for Hillside 
Food Production in the Caribbean. In Sustainable Food Production Practices in the 
Caribbean, ed. Wayne G. Ganpat and Wendy-Ann P. Isaac, 1–19. Kingston: Ian Randle 
Publishers.
192 |
Figure 4.1.: Flat or slanted-roof
Source: Chandler and Pulehuiki (2012)
Figure 4.2: Single-bed RS with an arched roof 
Source: Palada, Roan and Black (2003)
| 193
CHAPTER FOUR
Figure 4.3: Double-bed RS with an A-roof
Source: Palada, Roan and Black (2003)
Figure 4.4: Multiple-beds, large-scaled RS with an arched roof. 
Source:  Morris (2012)
194 |
Figure 4.6: Structural, covering, connecting, and fastening components of 
RH/NH.
Source: Palada, Roan and Black (2003)
| 195
Figure 4.8: A recommended crop rotation system
Source: Talekar, Su, and Lin (2003)
Figure 4.9: Plastic mulch being 
installed manually
Source: Palada, Roan and Black (2003)
196 |
Figure 4.10: Bacterial leaf spot and downy mildew of lettuce
Source: Koike (2010) and Smith and Koike (2010)
| 197
 Box 4.3: Construction process for RH/GH
Step 1
Step 2 
Step 3
Step 4
198 |
Aphids on Citrus Whitefly parasitised by 
entomopathogenic fungi
Fruitfly on guava Fruitfly larva in guava
| 199
CHAPTER FIVE
Ladybird larva feeding on aphids Ladybird pupa
Ocimum sanctum Tulsi Gliricidia  as a living fence
200 |
Lemongrass Pussley
Soursop Leaf Vervine
| 201
Farming on hillslopes
Contour farming on slopes Paramin, Trinidad
Contour farming on steep slopes
202 |
CHAPTER SIX
Cracking of soil in South Oropouche, Trinidad
Waterlogged soil in South Trinidad
Waterlogged field
| 203
Water logged soil in South Trinidad
Rain water harvesting in Moruga, Trinidad
Rain water harvesting in Moruga
204 |
Rain water harvesting in rural Trinidad
Water Storage
Desalinization Equipment
| 205
Polluted water  well
Sluice gate in South Trinidad
Solid waste polluting dammed water supply
206 |
South Oropouche river to Gulf of Paria Surface river water leading to sea
Surface water
Surface river water
| 207
Pond in Aranguez, Trinidad
Tributary supply to a dam
Turbid river water after heavy rains
208 |
Sustaining The Environment: 
Farm and Beyond the Farm
Marcus N.A. Ramdwar, Rohanie Maharaj and Narendra Siew
INTRODUCTION 
A complex interrelationship exists between food production and the 
environment. The prevention and control of environmental risks associated 
with food production is important for the preservation of human health 
and communities within which they exist. Agriculturists, in addition to 
their struggle to increase food production efficiencies, must consider 
environmental preservation to make food production sustainable. The agri 
or agro environment can simply be defined as the interactional impacts of 
agricultural practices on the environment.  Agricultural Environmental 
Management (AEM) must be given more importance as countries strive 
towards food security within the context of promoting sustainable agro-
ecosystems. Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) must be employed to 
sustain the environment taking into consideration all dimensions of the 
agricultural production system. However, commitments to the management 
of agricultural environments must seek to not only include GAPs, but must go 
beyond and specifically address the associated food safety and environmental 
risk elements related to the food production and agro-processing sector.  
Agricultural intensification has further contributed to environmental 
degradation since primary production agriculture is known to affect every 
component of the environment: surface and ground water, agricultural and 
non-agricultural land surfaces, the atmosphere and biodiversity. The main 
agricultural pollutants include pesticides, fertilizers, animal waste products 
and untreated manure.    There are intervention and preventative approaches 
that can go a long way in attempting to safeguard the environment from the 
negative impacts of food production. Environmental-friendly agriculture, 
through sustainable agricultural intensification efforts, will ensure minimal 
contamination and disturbance to the natural environment from farming 
C H A P T E R  SEVEN
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
and other agricultural related activities. The first step towards achieving agricultural 
sustainability would be to diagnose the impact of agricultural practices on the environment 
(Payraudeau and van der Werf 2005).
This chapter focuses on several of the complex interrelationships that exist between food 
production and food safety within an environmental context. Additionally, the chapter will 
provide recommendations to reduce the adverse impacts of agro-environmental hazards 
and food safety considerations which have a direct impact on people and societies in the 
Caribbean. The sources of environmental impacts from crop (pesticides, toxicity and 
fertilizers) and animal production (housing and waste management), identification of 
the key sources of contamination within the  food value chain, along with considerations 
to reduce food safety hazards, food safety regulations and food traceability systems are 
addressed.
NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION (NPS) MANAGEMENT 
Non-point source (NPS) pollution refers to the contaminants found in surface and sub-
surface soil and water resources that are diffused in nature and cannot be traced to a point 
location. In contrast to industrial and sewage pollution, it is less toxic and does not have 
one specific source of origin. Although it is less toxic, it poses serious threat to the health 
of human beings and their community. NPS pollution is not concentrated within a specific 
area, but has a dispersed character. It can affect a water body from sources such as run-offs 
from agricultural areas draining into rivers. The run-off from agricultural areas may contain 
bacteria, nitrates, ammonia, pesticides, phosphorous, minerals and sediments. Chowdary 
et al. (2001) for example have suggested that agriculture is the largest contributor to non-
point pollution to ground and surface water to the environment. 
From a chemical pollutant (man-made) perspective, the sources of non-point pollutants 
from crop production are seemingly more diverse than from livestock production. Livestock 
production on the other hand specifically contributes to non-point pollution contaminants 
from animal waste and from the slaughtering processes.  These two (2) types of production 
systems however, have similar adverse impacts on land surfaces related to: over-cropping, 
improper land preparation, over-grazing and over-stocking. Figure 7.1 shows the possible 
sources of non-point pollutants from crop and livestock production systems.
Non-point pollutants from the agriculture include the excessive use of fertilizers and 
improper fertilizer application; excessive use of pesticides, improper pesticide application 
and disposal of containers; sediments from hillsides which enter rivers and lakes, 
resulting from improper land preparation practices including deforestation and ‘slash 
and burn’ practices; and bacteria (faecal coliforms and Streptococci) from animal waste.
210 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
Figure 7.1: Agricultural nonpoint pollutants from crop and livestock 
production systems
Agricultural NPS pollution is the leading contributor to surface and ground water pollutants, 
thereby causing the water to become harmful to public health safety, aquatic animals 
and plant life dependent on water. Non-point pollution also affects water intended for 
consumption purposes for both humans and livestock.
Pesticides 
A global estimate of 4.6 million tons of chemical pesticides is sprayed into the environment 
annually (Zhang, Jiang and Ou 2011).  The need for pesticides in agriculture has become the 
norm to prevent crop loss attributed to pests. Pest injury to fruits, vegetables and cereals can 
reach 78, 54 and 32 percent respectively without the application of pesticides (Cai 2008). 
However, the improper use and application of pesticides can cause poisoning to humans 
and other organisms in the environment. Annually there are approximately 26 million cases 
of pesticide poisoning resulting in an approximate 220,000 deaths worldwide (Richter 
2002).  Pesticides and other chemicals released into the environment include the following:
• Weedicides, fungicides and insecticides used in the production and husbandry 
practices associated with producing food crops
• Chemicals such as copper sulphate used in animal foot baths and those used to 
sanitise animal pens and surroundings
| 211
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
• Insecticides used to spray animals for external parasites such as ticks. Large 
volumes of these are used in spray races and animal dips and are discarded into 
the environment after use
• Detergents and disinfectants that are used in operations such as dairying.
Eleftherohorinos (2008) pointed to the inappropriate use of pesticides which has resulted 
in adverse effects on non-target organisms (e.g. reduction of beneficial species populations); 
water contamination from mobile pesticides or from pesticide drift; air pollution from 
volatile pesticides; injury on non-target plants from herbicide drift; injury to rotational 
crops from herbicide residues left in the field; crop injury due to high application rates, 
wrong application timing, or unfavourable environmental conditions at and after pesticide 
application. The reported impacts of pesticide exposure on human health include the 
development of cancers, tumours and lesions, disruption of immune and endocrine systems, 
reproductive impairment and congenital defects and are consequentially the result from long 
term pesticide exposure, bio-concentration (mechanisms by which pesticides concentrate 
in fat tissue) and bio-magnification (increase in pesticide  concentration throughout the 
food chain).
Table 7.1: The fate processes of pesticides in the environment and the 
mechanisms associated with the processes
Fate Process Mechanism
Adsorption Positively charged chemical pesticide is attracted to negatively 
charged clay particles and organic matter.
Transfer Runoff: the movement of water along a sloping surface.
Volatilization: the conversation of a solid or liquid into a gas
Leaching: the movement of the pesticide through the soil rather than 
over it
Pesticide drifts: the unintentional airborne movement of droplets 
during pesticide application.
Crop removal
Degradation Chemical degradation: the breakdown of the pesticide by non-living 
factors e.g. temperature, moisture, pH and the pesticide’s chemical 
characteristics.
Biological degradation by microorganisms.
Photo-degradation: the breakdown of the pesticide by sunlight.
  Source: Fishel (2007) 
212 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
Fate of pesticides in the environment
The fate processes of a pesticide when applied to the environment fall into three 
(3) categories; adsorption, transfer and degradation. What is critical however, is the 
interaction of each of these factors and their interplay with the particular soil type and 
environmental conditions that determines the pesticide behaviour within the environment. 
Table1 summaries the fate processes of pesticides in the environment and the mechanisms 
associated with the processes.
The four major  properties that are important to a pesticide’s fate after application are:
i. Vapour pressure (volatility): relates to the ability of a pesticide to be converted 
into a gas.
ii. Adsorption: the process by which a pesticide is bound to or adsorped to soil or 
organic matter within the soil. When pesticides are adsorbed they are less likely 
to be leached.
iii. Water solubility: the more soluble a pesticide is, the greater its mobility within 
the environment and it is less likely to be leached.
iv. Persistence: or the length of time a pesticide remains active in the environment. 
It is a function of the chemical composition of the pesticide and the chemical 
and biological degradation processes, which break down the pesticide into a less 
harmful form.
There are several conditions which will hasten the process by which pesticides volatize; 
these include soils of a sandy composition and hot, dry, windy conditions. The size of 
the droplets being emitted from the spraying equipment also determines the rate of 
volatilization: - the smaller the droplets, the greater the rate of volatilization.  To therefore 
avoid the hot and windy conditions experienced during the day, it is recommended that 
volatile pesticides be sprayed late in the evening. The resultant loss of pesticide by this 
process will be considerably reduced, and there will be a long mode of action during the 
night time period into the sunrise. 
Pesticide toxicity 
Pesticide toxicity can either be classified according to the World Health Organisation 
(WHO) or Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as shown in Table 7.2.
| 213
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Table 7.2: WHO and EPA acute toxicity classes for pesticides
Acute* toxicity of pesticides
WHO Classification EPA Classification
Ia Extremely hazardous I Highly Toxic
Ib Highly Hazardous II Moderately Toxic
II Moderately hazardous III Slightly toxic
III Slightly hazardous IV Practically non-toxic
U Unlike to present acute hazard
*Any poisonous effect produced from a single or short exposure (24 to 96 hours) resulting in severe biological 
harm or death.
Adapted: Kamrin (1997)
The assignment of pesticides into toxicity classes will enable the applicator to assess the 
potential risk using the relationship:
Risk = Toxicity x Exposure
Based on the above formula, it can be seen that the level of risk can be predicted such 
that in the case of a very lethal pesticide, if there is very little exposure to the applicator 
or handler, the risk will not be great.  On the other hand, pesticides of low toxicity with 
prolonged exposure, can pose a high level risk of harm to the applicator or handler. 
The pesticide drift is dependent on the size of the droplets exiting the nozzle of the 
pesticide application equipment, the wind velocity and the distance between the point of 
exit from the equipment and target. The greater the distance from the point of exit to the 
target, the more likely is the potential for pesticide drift. In knapsack sprayers, the pressure 
of the spray exiting the tank has an impact on the size of the droplets.
The risk of pesticide contamination to ground water contamination is based on the 
solubility of the pesticide, level of adsorption, degree of persistence, the amount of clay 
and organic matter present, the size of the pore spaces within the soil, depth of the ground 
water and the amount and frequency of rainfall and irrigation. Table 7.3 provides a summary 
of the ground water contamination potential as influenced by water, pesticides and soil 
characteristics. It should be noted that although botanical pesticides such as pyrethrins, 
extracted from chrysanthemum flowers are relatively non-toxic to mammals there are highly 
toxic to fish, tadpoles, aquatic invertebrates and honeys bees. Additionally, pyrethrins are 
unstable in sunlight and have a half-life of 12 days.
Half-life is the amount of time it takes for ½ of the original material to be broken down 
or removed. For each additional half-life period, 50 percent of the remainder will be lost.
214 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
Table 7.3: Summary of groundwater contamination potential as influenced 
by water, pesticide and soil characteristics
Risk of ground water contamination
Low risk High risk
Chemical properties
Water solubility low high
Soil Adsorption high low
Persistence low high
Soil characteristics
Texture Fine clay Coarse sand
Organic matter high low
Site conditions
Pore spaces Few, small Many, large
Depth to ground water Deep, 30.5 m (100 ft.) or more Shallow, 6 m (20 ft.)or less
Rainfall or irrigation Small volumes at infrequent Large volumes at frequent 
intervals intervals
Source: McBride (1989)
Reducing the pesticide risk to the environment
Pesticides from agricultural and public health sources (eg. mosquito spraying programmes) 
will inevitably be leached into the environment. The following strategies can be used to
reduce the entry of chemicals into the environment.
1. Integrated Pest Management (IPM): The impact of pesticide entry can be 
reduced through careful examination of the pest life cycle and implementing an 
IPM approach, which places focus on knowing the pest’s biological characteristics 
and monitoring the pest behaviour in order to advance a control strategy. The 
IPM approach uses one or more of the following methods; biological, cultural, 
mechanical and physical, and chemical control. IPM is used as a long-term approach 
for controlling, but not eradicating the pest.  Chemical control methods are used 
last in the line of defence.
2. Reduce drift: Spraying should not be undertaken when wind or temperature 
favours pesticide drift to an off target area. The appropriate spray pressure, nozzle 
selection and spray shield to minimize drift should be used.
3. Avoid spraying near water bodies: Although agricultural soil is the recipient 
of most pesticides, adjacent water bodies are also affected. Avoid spraying pesticides 
along drains and water-ways. Use non-chemical methods of control. Check pesticide 
| 215
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
labels for warnings regarding use near bodies of water such as streams, rivers, 
and lakes.
4. Pesticide disposal: Calculate the expected quantity of pesticide required before 
purchasing to avoid the need to store excess, or incur possible wastage. Empty 
pesticide bottles should be washed at least three times and the resulting water added 
to the application mixture. Do not burn pesticide packaging. Contact the relevant 
municipal authority or national waste management authority for information on 
the safe disposal of your pesticide packaging.
5. Application site: Consider the soil texture, organic matter content, depth to 
ground water and slope of the site. Soil texture affects the movement of water 
and the movement of dissolved chemicals such as pesticides. The presence of 
organic matter will hold water and dissolved pesticides and within the root zone 
reducing the volume of runoff. The shallower the depth to groundwater, the less 
soil there will be available to act as a filter. The greater the slope’s gradient, the 
greater the volume of runoff, leaving the pesticide application site. The retention 
of pesticides within the soil as opposed to runoff pesticides will enable degradation 
and adsorption processes to occur.
6. Weather conditions and irrigation: Avoid applying pesticide (also fertilizers) 
when rainy conditions are forecasted, during rainfall, or when irrigation can 
influence runoff into surface water and leaching into ground water.
7. Mixing: Carefully mix pesticides according to the rate specified on the label.
8. Equipment: Maintain application equipment and calibrate accurately.
9. Buffer zone: Establish buffer zones to maintain a safe distance from wells and 
surface water (a minimum 15 m – 30 m is recommended); do not apply pesticides 
in buffer zones.
Fertilizers 
As a consequence of rapid population growth and industrialization, the amount of arable 
land available for farming is rapidly decreasing. Soils become depleted of nutrients from 
crop uptake, from harvesting which breaks the natural nutrient recycling, or through 
leaching and surface run-off. The use of fertilizers therefore has become more or less the 
accepted practice to ensure the realization of sustainable crop yield. It is also needed to 
replenish nutrient-depleted soil in order to maintain and enhance soil fertility to ensure 
food production.
216 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
In addition to the need for the use of fertilizers in the agricultural sector, there is an 
inadvertent risk to the environment attributed to excessive fertilizer application. There has 
been a projected upward global trend in the use of fertilizers from seven percent per year 
(Pluncknett 1995), 3.8 percent annually between 1989/1990 and 2010 (Alexandratos 1998) 
and an expected nitrogen use to grow by 1.1 percent annually from 1990 to 2070 (Frink, 
Waggoner and Ausubel 1999). The improper use of fertilizers can have several deleterious 
impacts to the environment, including:
1. Negative impacts on soil quality: The improper use of fertilizers can increase 
the soil acidity and impact the beneficial soil macro and microorganism.
2. Negative impacts to water bodies: Excessive and improper use of fertilizers 
can cause eutrophication, or the process by which nutrients from sediments are 
carried by runoff water into surface waters providing nourishment for algae in the 
aquatic ecosystem (nitrates and phosphates).  Where excessive plant growth in 
water bodies is attributed to human activities, it is known as cultural eutrophication, 
which is the primary environmental concern of surface water today (Yannawar 
and Bhosle 2013).
Effective fertilizer management 
The impact of fertilizer or manure application on the environment is dependent on the 
fertilizer source, the rate of application, the placement of the fertilizer and the timing of 
application. Bruulsema (2009) refers to this approach as the 4R nutrient stewardship 
concept, and underscores the importance of best practices, which require that a soil analysis 
is always done before implementing a fertilizer programme.  Nitrogen (N) and phosphorous 
(P) are two critical fertilizer nutrients, which can adversely impact the quality of ground 
and surface water. In this regard, it is very important that these two nutrients are carefully 
managed in crop production activities. 
It will also be critical to know when to apply plant nutrients in order to optimize the 
benefits from the fertilizer application. The recommendation is that nitrogenous fertilizers 
be applied during the maximum growth phase of the plant, for them to be efficiently utilised. 
This will ensure that the fertilizer is efficiently used, and that less opportunity exists for 
residuals in the soil and loss from surface run-off or leaching. Split application of fertilizers 
will ensure minimum losses resulting from surface run-off and leaching, particularly in the 
case of nitrogen fertilizer management. Other methods, by which nitrogen fertilizers can be 
managed, include: the use of slow release fertilizers which can significantly reduce nitrogen 
losses, and the use of nitrification inhibitors which delay the microbiological transformation 
of ammonium to nitrates. Iron supplements can be used alone, or in combination with 
| 217
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
reduced nitrogen fertilizer to elicit a greening response, thereby reducing the amount of 
nitrogen leaching from crop production activities.  Careful consideration must be given to 
the application of fertilizers on slopes as this must be kept to a minimum and always placed 
on the uphill side of the slope, shown as ‘X’ in Figure 7.2.
The management of phosphorus loss from crop fields into waterways can be prevented by 
ensuring that it is applied at the recommended rate based on a soil test.  The notion that high 
rates of phosphorus will not be injurious to plants, and as such can be applied in high rates 
to build up soil levels, is no longer an acceptable practice. Although phosphorus moves very 
little within the soil, soil erosion and run-off are processes that cause phosphorus pollution 
of water.  The following approaches can be used to reduce phosphorus movement into runoff 
water: conservation tillage, terraces, contour farming, grasses way, vegetative filter strips, 
and cover crops.  Strips of unfertilized grass or natural vegetation near water channels or 
water bodies can assist in reducing soil erosion, and behave as a trap for unwanted nutrients, 
thereby preventing any deleterious impacts to the environment. Grass barriers are narrow 
strips (approximately 1.2 m) of tall, erect, stiff-stemmed, native warm-season perennial 
grasses planted on the field contour (Kemper et al. 1992). Grass barriers and strips have 
proven to be economical means to:
i. Reduce run-off and promote infiltration   (Meyer, Dabney and Harmon 1995)
ii. Enhance deposition of soil and organic matter ( Melville and Morgan 2001)
iii. Promote degradation of sediment-bound chemicals (Groffman et al. 1991)
Figure 7.2: Placement of fertilizer on the uphill side of slope (X)
218 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
The misconception also appears to exist, that organic fertilizers such as manures cannot be 
detrimental to the environment when in fact, manure application to crop lands contributes 
significantly to both nitrogen and phosphorus-loaded run-off into streams, rivers and 
lakes. Figure 7.3 shows algal growth attributed to nutrient rich run-off from animal waste. 
Additionally, there is a belief that increasing fertilizer use can increase yield.  This occurs up 
to a point, beyond which, any further increase in fertilizer application will not be effective, 
resulting in economic losses and environmental harm.
Animal production 
World population growth along with demographic factors such as age, structure and 
urbanization has influenced the demand for livestock food products tremendously. In 
addition to this, economic growth and a concomitant increase in individual incomes and 
by extension the standard of living, have also contributed to a shift in dietary choices and a 
subsequent increase in the demand for animal products. The livestock sector has responded 
to this increase in demand by improving production efficiencies via strategic changes in 
animal breeding and genetics, reproduction, nutrition, animal health care and housing. 
These controlled modifications have led to the intensive model of livestock production. 
Animal production systems may be broadly categorized as being either intensive or 
extensive, however it must be noted that some systems show features of both categories and 
are hence categorized as semi-intensive. Intensification, as it relates to animal production, 
may be defined as the rearing of many animals in a single location in close proximity to each 
other. The drastic increase in animal population densities associated with intensification 
usually result in attending problems associated with the animals’ requirement for nutrition 
and feeding, health and environmental management. In the regional context, because of 
the relatively small size of states, competing interests for land use, praedial larceny, hilly 
topography and the need to control the environment for animal production exist, resulting 
in many of our livestock production systems moving towards the adoption of intensive 
systems for production. Examples of intensive systems used in the region are:
i. Large tunnel ventilated houses for broiler production (with bird density of less 
than 0.09 m2 per bird), which utilises the deep litter system of production.
ii. Open side naturally ventilated houses for broiler production using the deep litter 
system.
iii. Slatted floor and deep litter systems for small ruminant (sheep and goats) 
production.
iv. Feedlot systems for cattle and water buffalo production.
v. Intensive swine production facilities.
| 219
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Industrial farm animal production (IFAP)
The term industrial farm animal production (IFAP) has been used by Halden and Schwab 
(2010), to describe this type of intensive production on a very large scale in some developed 
countries. Specifically for the Caribbean, two key features of intensive systems are found, 
involving the use of relatively small land areas, resulting in high animal to land ratio and 
the use of housing structures and equipment designed to:
• protect the animal from the environment and predators
• ensure timely and controlled supply of feed nutrients and water
• exclude disease causing organisms and prevent spread of diseases
• facilitate the easy handling of animals
• facilitate timely and efficient removal of waste
The biggest environmental concern with respect to intensive systems, is the timely 
removal and safe disposal of animal waste. Conversely, within extensive animal production 
systems, animals are not kept in close proximity to each other and animal production 
densities are comparatively low. The term range operation is often used to describe the 
release of animals on large expanses of land where they have to seek their own food and 
water supplies. Within this type of system, land degradation from overgrazing constitutes 
a major environmental concern.
In general, animal production operations impact the environment (water, soil and air) 
due to the large volume of animal waste produced. In situations where there is a lack of 
adequate regulations and monitoring policies to reduce the incidence of pollution, the 
environment is negatively impacted. The major effects are as follows:
1. Nutrient pollution of ground and surface water resources from inappropriate 
management of animal waste (manure).
2. Contamination and pollution of ground and surface water resources by the various 
chemicals used in animal husbandry.
3. Contamination of ground and surface water resources with microorganisms.
4. Overuse of fresh water resources leading to depletion.
5. Degradation of land from overgrazing.
6. Production and release of odorous gases and toxic substances.
7. Release of particulates and bio-aerosols containing pathogens into the atmosphere. 
8. Consumption of non-renewable energy for feed production and transport.
220 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
Global animal manure production
Animal production produces much more waste than the amount produced by humans. 
Notwithstanding this, animal waste is less strictly regulated in terms of its management and 
disposal. In the past, with traditional extensive systems, manure did not present as much 
of an environmental problem as it now does, due to much lower animal populations, lower 
stocking densities and correspondingly, lower animal manure output. As a consequence, 
the natural cleansing systems found in many ecosystems were not overburdened.
It is essential that the waste disposal from livestock production is carefully managed to 
prevent harmful impacts on human health, water quality, air quality and soil properties. 
Large volumes of both solid and liquid waste (Figure 7.4) are produced from animal feeding 
lots, the major fraction of which is manure, but the waste also contain many chemicals used 
in modern animal husbandry.
Land degradation from overgrazing
 Overgrazing is considered to be the major cause of soil degradation worldwide (Oldemann, 
Hakkeling and Sombroek 1991), accounting for 35.8 percent of all forms of degradation. 
Land degradation refers to those processes that render the land no longer useful for 
agricultural purposes due to deterioration in quality. Grazing livestock can alter and damage 
the ecosystem of the lands they graze. Overgrazing of an area can lead to insufficient time 
for grass regeneration, resulting in soil depletion, erosion and desertification. Overgrazing 
is a function of time and not necessarily a function of animal numbers on a specific area of 
grazing land. Farmers have moved to reduce overgrazing by rotating livestock in different 
pastures to allow plant growth to continue. However, this is not always carried out for long 
enough periods to enable the soil to fully recover. Animals should not be turned out to 
the pastures before the plants have fully recovered.  In many of the Caribbean territories 
where the extensive/semi-extensive system of production is practiced, the limited acreage 
of available land for livestock production and the nature of the terrain of available lands 
often lead to overgrazing and soil erosion. This occurs as the animals are left in a single 
pasture for an extended period of time. In many situations, small ruminants such as sheep 
will graze so close to the ground that the soil is left exposed. To prevent the negative effects 
of overgrazing, the following should be integrated into livestock production systems.  These 
include: land and soil management (e.g. pasture rotation and fertility management), animal 
management (e.g. managing animal distribution and their proximity to water supply), and 
strategic marketing to avoid overpopulation of herds/flocks and to reduce herd/flock size in 
times when forage availability is low e.g. in the dry season. Table 7.4 provides the commonly 
used stocking densities for livestock and poultry production in the region.
| 221
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Table 7.4: Commonly used stocking densities for livestock and poultry 
production in the region 
Species Type of System Stocking Density
Intensive Extensive
Broilers Open Ventilated (deep _ approx. 0.09 m2 (1.0 ft2) per bird
litter system)
Broilers Tunnel Ventilated houses _ approx. 0.08 m2 (0.90 ft2) per bird
(deep litter)
Layers Intensive/deep litter approx. 0.23 m2 (2.5 ft2) per bird
Sheep and Goat Deep litter/concrete approx. 1.49m2-1.85 m2 (16-20 ft2 ) 
floor/earthen floor per animal
Ewe/doe with lambs
Sheep and Goats Grazing **1 animal unit per acre
animals
Sheep and Goats Deep litter/concrete approx. 0.74m2 – 0.93m2 (8-10 ft2) 
floor/earthen floor per animal
Feeder lambs/kids
Sheep and Goats Slatted floor approx. 0.69 m2 (7.5 ft2)
Ewe/doe (35kg)
Sheep and goats Slatted floor approx. 0.90 m2 (9.7 ft2)
Ewe/doe (50kg)
Sheep and Goats Slatted floor approx. 1.09 m2 (11.8 ft2)
Ewe/doe (70kg)
Sheep and Goats Slatted floor approx. 0.29 m2 (3.2 ft2)
Lamb/kid
Sheep and goats Slatted floor approx. 0.69 m2 (7.5 ft2)
Weaner lamb/kid
Sheep and goats Slatted floor approx 1.5 m2 (16 ft2)
Buck/ram
Cattle Grazing **One animal unit/acre
Cattle Feedlot system approx. 11.15m2 (120 ft2) per animal
Swine Intensive concrete floor 
system
• Sows and boars approx. 2.3 m2(25 ft2) animal
• Sow with piglets approx.3.25 m2 (35 ft2)
• Weaner pigs approx. 0.28m2(3 ft2)per animal
• Growing pigs approx.0.56 m2(6 ft2)  per animal
• Finishing pigs approx.0.84 m2 (9 ft2 )per animal
**1 animal unit is equal to one adult cow – roughly 450kg or 9–10 sheep/goats
222 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
Use of fresh water resources and its depletion from livestock
Agriculture is the largest consumer of fresh water, accounting for 70 percent of total fresh 
water use (Steinfeld et al. 2006).  It also accounts for in excess of 90 percent of total water 
depletion rates. Some areas where water is specifically used in animal production include:
• Drinking purposes – A large lactating dairy cow that is producing 35 l of milk per 
day will consume in excess of 120 l of water in hot dry conditions. 
• Washing and cleaning – a tremendous volume of fresh water is used in animal 
agriculture on a daily basis for washing and cleaning feedlot facilities, washing 
animals, and the managing of animal waste in the form of slurry.  A classic example 
are the large commercial swine units, which often use flushing systems and where 
water consumption is often several times the drinking water needs. 
• Cooling of animals, facilities and products e.g. misting and drip cooling for animals, 
milk cooling facilities, etc.
• Product processing – such as animal slaughtering and processing of meat and milk 
processing amongst others. In addition to slaughtering, water use in these facilities 
includes that which is used for offal processing and rendering. 
• Evapo-transpiration losses associated with livestock evapo-transpiration is the 
main mechanism by which crop and grassland deplete water resources (Steinfeld 
et al. 2006). 
Most of livestock’s contribution to evapotranspiration losses is due to the production 
of corn and soybean.  In the Caribbean region, the contribution to water depletion by this 
means is minimal, since little grain for feeding animals is produced, and pasture irrigation 
is carried out on a limited scale during the dry season. However, it must be noted that the 
region imports large volumes of corn and soybean meal which constitute 100 percent of the 
ration fed to monogastric animals (poultry and pigs in particular), and approximately 40 
percent of the ration fed to ruminants. Therefore the regional contribution to the depletion 
of water resources in this way is indirect.
Nutrient pollution of ground and surface water
Not all the nutrients consumed by the animal are digested, a considerable fraction is 
undigested and passed out in the excreta. Manure contains solid and liquid animal waste, 
much of this is returned to the environment when livestock facilities are cleaned. The 
manure contains a large volume of nutrients such as N, P and potassium (K).  In addition to 
nutrients, drug residues, heavy metals and pathogens are also carried in animal waste and 
| 223
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
constitute a pollution concern. Contamination of water sources from animal waste usually 
stem from runoff from facilities directly in drainage systems, disposal in the waterways or 
watersheds, and from percolation through the soil and into water sources. 
The two nutrients of major concern are N and P, with P tending to be more of a problem 
with surface water quality and Nitrogen more of a problem with ground water quality when 
nitrate leaches through soil layers (Steinfeld et al. 2006). High concentrations of nutrients 
in these water resources contribute as previously stated, to eutrophication. Animal farming 
therefore markedly increases the quantity of nutrients reaching the water. When these 
nutrients enter the water systems, algal growth is stimulated and the clarity of the water 
is reduced. Algal blooms and resulting microbial activity exhaust the dissolved oxygen in 
the aquatic ecosystem and impairs the proper functioning of the ecosystem. The process of 
decomposition of the algae also utilizes oxygen which reduces the bioavailability for fish and 
other aquatic life. The end results are diverse, and in addition to damaging the functioning 
of the ecosystem, include:
• A shift in habitat characteristics
• Replacement of desirable species of fish with less desirable ones
• Production of toxins by certain algae
• Loss of recreational use
• Clogging of drainage canals leading to flooding in the wet season
Nitrogen in manure may occur both in organic and inorganic forms. Depending on the 
form, it may be stored and immobilised within the soil, leached to ground water, or can be 
volatilized. Loses from excreta can take four main forms:
1. Ammonia (NH3) - volatilization of inorganic N from housing, storage or pasture.
2. Dinitrogen (N2) - nitrates are transformed to N2 (harmless form).
3. Nitrous oxide (N2O) - a harmful by-product produced under conditions of organic 
carbon deficiency.
4. Nitrate (NO3) - lost to water resources in this form as it is very mobile in soil 
solution and can easily enter ground water. High nitrate in water resources present 
health issues such as poisoning in infants (methemoglobinemia), and abortion and 
stomach cancer in adults.
Steinfeld et al. (2006) identified five levels at which strategies to improve waste 
management should be targeted.  These are at the:
224 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
1. Production level – the focus here is to increase feed use efficiency by the animal 
and reduce the quantity of excreta and hence the quantity of nutrients voided into 
the environment. Digestibility and therefore bioavailability of feed nutrients are 
two key components. Nutrition and feeding strategies strive to meet the nutrient 
needs of the animals without overfeeding so that there are minimal nutrients in 
the excreta. Animals that are overfed usually have lower levels of digestibility. 
Increasing feed efficiency can be accomplished by using a number of approaches 
including : 
ƒ Utilisation of feed ingredients with easily digested and absorbed nutrients 
e.g. low phytate corn.  P excretion will be reduced as it is contained in 
phytate in a form that is not available to the animal.
ƒ Not overfeeding, as this leads to excess nutrients such as minerals (macro 
and micro) being voided in the faeces.  In addition, if protein is overfed, 
more N will be present in the urine.
ƒ Utilisation of feed additives e.g. enzymes, to aid in improving digestibility 
and hence bioavailability of nutrients. One classical example of the 
application of this technology exist where much of the P in feed 
ingredients used for monogastric animals (pigs and poultry) exists in 
the phytate form.  These animals do not have the enzyme phytase which 
will make the phytate-P available. Adding phytase to the diets of both 
pigs and poultry has been shown to significantly reduce P voided in the 
faeces, and hence result in an increase in the bioavailability of P in these 
feed ingredients.
ƒ Pelleting feed to increase digestibility.
ƒ Breeding and selection of animals with better feed efficiency and growth 
rates.
ƒ Improving general environmental conditions and reducing the animal’s 
exposure to stressors.
2. Collection level - manure is usually collected in a relatively solid form (as it is 
produced by the animal), or in a more liquid form where water is added to bring 
it to a slurry. Adding water to it increases its volume due to the dilution process 
(LPES, 2005). In this state, it facilitates pollution from runoff. In general it is best 
to minimize the amount of water coming into contact with the manure to reduce 
the amount of run-off.
| 225
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
3. Storage level - the aim of storage should be to reduce components of the manure 
escaping into the soil and water ways. Most of the storage systems utilized in the 
Caribbean involve collecting the waste and stockpiling it in an area on the farm 
where it is exposed to the climatic elements. In some production systems such as 
the slatted floor for sheep and goat production, manure is allowed to accumulate 
under the raised floors for extended periods (sometimes up to six months). The 
challenge is to keep the accumulated manure dry.  This is unachievable in most 
instances, and the end result is a malodour associated with the breakdown of the 
manure and release of associated gases into the atmosphere along with runoff into 
drains and eventually into larger waterways. In addition to this, it often presents 
a suitable habitat for rodent infestation and proliferation.
4. Processing level - options available for processing manure with an aim to 
reduce pollution include aeration technology, anaerobic digestion to reduce 
chemical oxygen demand, biological oxygen demand and produce methane gas, 
sedimentation of biosolids, flocculation, composting, drying of manure and 
lagooning systems favouring natural biological activity and reduced pollution.
5. Utilisation level - when used as a fertilizer option for crop production, manure 
not only provides nutrients for plants but also improves soil characteristics such 
as soil structure, soil aeration, and water holding capacity, increases biological 
life in soils, improves cation exchange capacity, improves soil fertility and soil 
aggregate stability. Manure can also be used in the form of feed for fish and some 
other species to provide nutrients, although this may have some stigma attached 
to it. In many parts of the world manure is also used to produce energy in the form 
of methane gas that may be used in households on farms or in slaughter facilities.
Microbial contamination of fresh water resources
Manure may contain many pathogenic organisms and parasites which pose serious 
implications for human health. Many of these pathogens and parasites have a long 
residential time in the environment and lie dormant until conditions are favourable for 
their activation. Some of these pathogenic organisms associated with manure that has 
human health implications are: Campylobacter spp., Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp., 
Clostridium spp., viruses (e.g. picornavirus, parvovirus, adenovirus, Rinderpest virus), 
protozoa and internal parasites.
226 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
Veterinary drug residues and chemical contamination of aquatic 
environment
Antimicrobials are not only used in livestock production to treat diseases, but also as 
preventative medicine and productivity enhancers. When used in this manner, they are 
used at low levels over a long duration of time. In livestock production, the non-therapeutic 
fraction includes non-nutritive feed additives such as monensin, avilamycin, flavomycin, 
salinomycin, lincomycin and roxarsone.
The negative effects on the environment arise because a large portion of the drugs used 
are not degraded in the animal’s body and ultimately end up in the environment. The 
consequence of these drugs ending up in the environment is the development of resistance 
by microorganisms.
Figure 7.5: The active drug ingredients found in broiler starter feed
| 227
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Hormones are other biochemical compounds that are commonly used in production 
enterprises as ear implants or as feed additives to control growth and metabolism. Some 
are also used in reproduction to control the oestrous cycle by inducing or synchronizing 
oestrus. Some of these hormones may be natural e.g. estradiol and progesterone, while 
others are synthetic e.g. zeranol, melengestrol acetate and trenbolone acetate. No direct 
implications on human health have been scientifically proven when they are used at the 
correct application rates. The concern however relates to the potential effect as endocrine 
disrupters in humans and wild life. Some of these synthetic hormones can remain in the 
environment for a very long time e.g. trenbolone acetate in manure piles and therefore can 
find their way into fresh water resources.
Trace minerals are those required in the animal diet at levels lower than 0.01 percent in 
the ration, these include iron, copper, zinc, molybdenum, cobalt, iodine, manganese and 
selenium. Some of these are considered heavy metals and their improper use can lead to 
accumulation in soil and waterways in many ecosystems. In addition copper and zinc are 
commonly used in footbaths and as a disinfecting agent, and are routinely disposed of in 
the environment.
Livestock production and sediment load in fresh water resources
Livestock production contributes significantly to soil erosion, not only leading to soil and 
fertility loss, but also to sediment loading of streams, rivers, lakes and marine ecosystems 
alike. Livestock contribution to soil erosion and sedimentation is a consequence of animal 
feed production and the improper management of the cultivated lands, as well as the 
impact of livestock hooves on the land and the effects of overgrazing on pastures.  Animal 
hooves cause significant compaction of the soil in areas where they are concentrated such 
as feeding, shading and resting, grazing and watering areas. The impact of the hoof is two-
fold, whereby in the wet season the compaction effect is more pronounced, and in the dry 
season the surface of the compacted areas is loosened and the soil is carried away easily by 
the first heavy rains. Soil compaction in general will serve to reduce infiltration rates and 
consequently increase surface runoff, which is a major contributor to soil erosion. Steinfeld 
et al. (2006) summarised the sum total of the effects as follows:
i. Reduced water holding capacity of the soil in the areas grazed and occupied by 
livestock
ii. Increased sedimentation in water ways resulting in:
ƒ obstruction of the channels
ƒ destruction of ecosystems e.g. coral reefs where sedimentation obstructs 
feeding areas and nesting sites
228 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
ƒ increased water turbidity resulting in less light penetration and therefore 
reduced algae and plant growth
ƒ increased probability that rivers will flood their banks due to a reduced 
cross-sectional area of the channels
ƒ more nutrients and chemicals transported to distant sites which will 
contaminate fresh water resources
ƒ eutrophication
Livestock production and air pollution
Climate change and the global increase in average temperatures are often attributed to 
an increase in the production and release into the atmosphere of the greenhouse gases 
carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. Activities related to livestock production emit 
considerable amounts of these gases (18 percent of total anthropogenic greenhouse gas 
emissions), and therefore contribute to climate change. The following provides approaches 
essential to addressing the reduction of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and ammonia 
emissions into the environment from livestock production: 
1. Carbon dioxide emissions – it is essential that the environmental focus be 
specific in addressing issues of land degradation and land use change, which can 
be achieved by:
ƒ Establishment of improved pastures and rotational grazing management.
ƒ Reducing deforestation while intensifying agricultural production, i.e. the 
creation of incentives for forest conservation and reduced deforestation. 
This option will have to be supported by intensification of agricultural 
production to meet food security needs. This will involve the use of 
improved varieties (in terms of acclimatization, yield and disease 
resistance), better water management and increased fertilizer use, as the 
resulting decrease in carbon emission due to more forest conservation 
will outweigh the increased emissions due to more fertilizer use many 
times over.
ƒ Restoring soil organic carbon to cultivated soils via the utilisation of 
conservation tillage options, agricultural intensification and erosion 
reduction.
ƒ Using agroforestry options in livestock production.
| 229
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
2. Methane emissions from the ruminant animal
 These can be reduced by:
ƒ Improving the nutrition of the animal, as methane emissions from the 
rumen increase with poorer quality diets.  Options include improving 
digestibility or the digestive process. Increasing the starch content in the 
diet also provides an option for more readily fermentable carbohydrates 
which will reduce methane production.
ƒ Improved genetics, whereby animals with better feed conversion 
efficiencies and growth rate are available so that animal productivity 
increases.
ƒ More advanced options that need additional evaluation include the 
reduction of hydrogen production in the rumen by stimulating acetogenic 
bacteria, eliminating certain protozoan from the rumen (defaunation), 
and vaccination to reduce methanogens.
3. Methane production from the manure as anaerobically managed manure will 
result in methane release
ƒ Proper balancing of feed will result in lower methane emissions as lower 
carbon to nitrogen ratios in feed lead to methane emissions.
ƒ The storage temperature of manure is important as at lower storage 
temperatures the methane production is highly reduced.
ƒ The use of biogas digesters where there is controlled anaerobic digestion 
of the manure in an enclosed environment, and the methane produced 
can be captured and utilized in the production framework or disposed 
of safely.
4. Nitrous emissions and ammonia volatilisation through improving the efficiency 
with which nitrogen is used
ƒ Balanced feeding – giving the animal its daily protein/amino acid needs 
and not overfeeding protein.
ƒ Improved feeding practices such as grouping physiologically similar 
animals.
ƒ The use of an enclosed tank during storage to prevent volatilisation.
ƒ With grazing animals, avoid overgrazing and grazing animals on pastures 
with young lush forages that may have highly soluble nitrogen.
230 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
Food safety
One-third of all food produced in the world is lost or wasted from farm to fork, according 
to estimates produced by the FAO (2011). This wastage not only has an enormous negative 
impact on the global economy and food availability, but it also has major environmental 
impacts. Recent studies suggest that the world will need 70 to 100 percent more food by 
2050 (Godfray et al. 2010).  According to the FAO (2001), food security is defined as ‘a 
situation that exists when all people at all times have physical or economic access to 
sufficient,	 safe	and	nutritious	 food	 to	meet	 their	dietary	needs	and	 food	preferences	
for an active and healthy life’. Additionally, an inherent assumption of food security is 
that food is nutritious and safe. Food production in developing countries can be severely 
affected by market interventions in the developed world, such as subsidies or price supports 
(Godfray et al. 2010). Such is the case in the Caribbean region where preferential access 
to EU markets for exports such as banana and sugar has been lost. The effects of climate 
change, as well as the harsh competition in world markets underscore the openness and 
vulnerability of small, trade-dependent economies. The Caribbean is one of the most food 
insecure regions in the western hemisphere and has a high dependence on imported food. 
Food and nutrition security and safety are now important items on political agendas in the 
Caribbean region. The region must seek to find sustainable solutions to the challenges in 
the food and agriculture sector, as well as its vulnerability to global trends in food safety.
Food safety is a priority issue in agriculture, particularly in developing countries due to 
its linkage with food security and agricultural trade. The issue of genetically modified (GM) 
foods is also closely linked to food safety.  Food safety is defined as ‘providing assurance that 
food will not cause harm to the consumer when it is prepared and/or eaten according to its 
intended use (FAO 2001), while the WHO (2004) refers to it in terms of food-borne illness, 
and defines it as diseases, usually either infectious or toxic in nature, caused by agents 
that enter the body through the ingestion of food’. Food safety refers to the conditions and 
practices that ensure foods are protected from unintentional contamination, thus rendering 
them safe to eat. It is a function of the nature of technology used to produce and process 
food. As such, it can be manipulated through genetic improvement, agronomic practices 
and post-production storage and processing (FAO 2001). 
Food consumption all over the world is a mixture of imported agricultural products 
and domestic products making it difficult to find the contamination source in the case of 
a food scare. The globalization of the food production and the intensification of food trade 
enhance the risks associated with food safety (Polimeni, Iorgulescu and Bălan 2013). Food 
safety involves the implementation of several practices and strategies, aimed at avoiding the 
contamination of food, and the growth and proliferation of organisms, along the continuum 
| 231
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
of production to consumption or ‘from farm to fork’ (Figure 7.6). Contamination can occur at 
several points along this food value chain such as on the farm or in the field, at the slaughter 
house, during processing, during transportation, in traded products, and in the home.
Management of food safety at the primary stage of production (i.e. the farm), is 
accomplished mainly through prevention of contamination as illustrated in Table 7.5. On-
farm food safety practices help producers reduce the potential for hazard contamination 
of crops, livestock, personnel (farm workers and other employees) and facilities. Such 
contamination could lead to risks for crop or livestock produce, product spoilage (reduction 
in quality and subsequently quantity) and human injury or illness (choking, infections, 
diseases, illnesses and death).  Once a hazard of any kind has been identified, it is important 
to assess the risk of injury or harm. 
Failure to reduce food safety risks leads to an increasing strain on farm, and by extension, 
national economies, due to loss of productive work time, increasing cost of health care, 
costly surveillance programmes, loss of life, impact of vulnerable segments of the population 
(including children, aged persons and low income groups), impact on trade, and reduced 
food security. 
Figure 7.6: ‘Farm to Fork’ Food Value Chain
  
  SEED/PLANT MATERIAL
 
  
PLANT PRODUCTION
 
 
 PRODUCE, CROPS,  
COMMODITIES  ANIMAL FEED
 
 
 ANIMAL PRODUCTION 
 
 
 PROCESSING OF PRODUCTS FROM 
 FOODS ANIMALS 
 
 
CONSUMER 
Figure 6. “Farm to Fork” Food Value Chain 
232 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
Table 7.5: Some on-farm considerations to reduce food safety hazards
On-Farm Types of Food Verification Mitigation Effects
Considerations Safety Hazards/
Contamination
Use of fertilizers Chemical and Understanding Can be stored in plastic closed containers 
microbial whether to use but not on floor, soil or with harvested 
organic or inorganic products
fertilizers Powders, granules and liquids should 
Test for N, P, K be stored in covered areas to avoid 
nutrients. contaminating water sources
Lime and gypsum can be stored in the 
field
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) must 
be available.
Naturally Microbial Analysis of soil pH, • Ensure soil is not acidic.
occurring toxins:- organic matter, • Ensure organic matter content is 
Mycotoxins, heavy metal levels acceptable to stabilize heavy metals.
such as aflatoxin Analysis of water to 
and ochratoxin determine that levels • Avoidance of phosphate based 
A, are found at of heavy metals are fertilizers as they contain high contents 
measurable levels within the acceptable of cadmium. 
in many staple range. • Establish records that indicated the 
foods date sampled, site sampled, tree 
sampled, water source sampled. All 
records must be signed by the relevant 
person at each stage throughout the 
sampling and testing procedures. All 
testing should be done at a certified 
laboratory.
Polycyclic Chemical Contamination Chemical analysis of air, water, soil and 
aromatic from airborne processed foods.
hydrocarbons transportation of 
diseased particles, 
soil, water, emissions 
from forest fires and 
processing of foods 
such as drying and 
smoking
Postharvest Physical, Routine Inspection Use of GAPs and GMPs
operations chemical and and testing of Implement farm certification and 
(handling, microbial produce monitoring systems. The use of sorting, 
storage, drying, pre-cooling, chlorinated wash water, dips, 
processing, refrigeration, packaging and appropriate 
packaging, transport and storage containers can 
transportation, reduce microbial load and improve quality 
marketing) and shelf-life.
| 233
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
On-Farm Types of Food Verification Mitigation Effects
Considerations Safety Hazards/
Contamination
Site selection: physical, Soil testing for Review previous crop storage where 
potential for chemical and physical, chemical there may be possible heavy build-up of 
contamination microbial and microbial herbicides that can harm other crops. 
of crops, erosion contamination
of soil, drainage 
issues and wind 
exposure
Heavy metals:  Physical and Analysis of soil pH, • Ensure soil pH is not acidic.
e.g. lead, mercury, chemical organic matter, • Ensure organic matter content is 
cause neurological heavy metal levels
damage in infants Analysis of water to acceptable to stabilize heavy metals.
and children. determine that levels • Avoidance of phosphate based 
Exposure to of heavy metals are fertilizers as they contain high contents 
cadmium can within the acceptable of cadmium. 
also cause kidney range.
damage, usually • Establish records to include date 
seen in the elderly. sampled, site sampled, tree sampled, 
water source sampled. All records must 
be signed by relevant persons at each 
stage throughout the sampling and 
testing procedures. All testing should 
be done at a certified laboratory.
Sanitary Microbial Testing for microbial Provision of adequate sanitary facilities, 
conveniences contamination including potable water, rest areas and 
hand-washing facilities. On-farm living 
quarters must have basic amenities. 
Supply clean water, soap and single-use 
towels for hand washing. 
Water including Physical, Physical inspection Physical waste identified separated and 
potable water, chemical and and testing for re-cycled where appropriate. Use of 
irrigation/ microbial contamination retention ponds and pre-treatment of 
fertigation and (chemical and water. When potable water is unavailable 
waste water microbial-faecal test water and keep records.
coliforms).
Chemical storage Chemical Appropriate chemical storage, adopt farm 
area and labelling, verification of certification, training and monitoring 
including workers labelling on systems. Use only approved pesticides 
handling and or chemicals in correct dosage and according to label 
administering instructions. Use of material safety data 
veterinary testing maximum Sheets (MSDS) and appropriate personal 
medicines, residue levels (MRLs) protective equipment (PPEs). Practice 
chemicals and on crops and foods crop rotation and implement an IPM 
disinfectants system, including biological controls.
234 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
On-Farm Types of Food Verification Mitigation Effects
Considerations Safety Hazards/
Contamination
Use of manure Pathogenic Adequate treatment Know source of manure
bacteria (e.g. of manure, use of Understand when to apply manure
Escherichia manure compost Adapt soil testing and GAPs
coli O157:H7, piles to achieve high Separate manure storage and treatment 
Salmonella and temperatures to kill from fresh produce areas i.e. physical 
Cryptosporidium) pathogenic bacteria containment of manure to avoid 
Faecal contamination by other animals including 
Chemical birds and pests as well as fresh produce.
Contaminants, such as mycotoxins, veterinary drugs or dyes can be introduced into foods 
either as a result of their occurrence in the environment, natural infection by fungi, or other 
human activities. Other chemicals such as mercury, lead, cadmium, chloroform, benzene 
and polychlorinatedbiphenyls (PCBs) can get into the water supplies that are used to process 
foods. IPM, required by both domestic and export markets can bring about a reduction in 
chemical use and help in the protection of the environment. It involves the application of 
pesticides and herbicides only when necessary, preferring environment- friendly chemicals, 
and promoting the use of biological control and can be used in a variety of crops such as 
avocado, mango, pepper, tomato and citrus. 
Poor sanitation during each stage of the transport process greatly increases microbial 
contamination of fresh produce consumption of which, can result in food- borne illness. 
Most of the reported outbreaks have been associated with bacterial contamination, 
particularly members of the Enterobacteriaceae, followed by viruses, and then parasites. 
The most commonly recognized foodborne infections are caused by Campylobacter, 
Salmonella and Escherichia coli O157:H7. The viruses involved in outbreaks have a human 
reservoir (e.g. Norwalk-like and Hepatitis A), and can be associated with products grown 
in contact with the soil and/or water. Outbreaks linked to protozoa (e.g. Cryptosporidium, 
Cyclospora, Giardia) have been associated more with fruits than vegetables. Protozoa and 
viruses are most often associated with contaminated water or food handlers (European 
Commission 2002).
Since no farmer or food manufacturer can guarantee neither food safety on their own, nor 
safety throughout the food value chain, certification standards such as Global GAP, HACCP 
and ISO 22000 play key roles in ensuring food safety. Global GAP focuses on the farming 
side of the value chain while the ISO 22000 and HACCP can be applied to every stage of 
the food value chain. Capacity building in the form of post-harvest extension and training 
programmes which include traceability and record keeping procedures are also components 
of these standards. Independent third parties or certification bodies can conduct audits of 
| 235
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
farms, organizations and suppliers along the entire value chain, and issue a certificate to 
confirm a successful audit. However, the acceptance of food safety standards and certification 
may vary from market to market. 
Regulatory environment
National food control systems are essential to protect the health and safety of domestic 
consumers, as without these, consumers can be susceptible to food borne illness outbreaks. 
They are also critical in enabling countries to assure the safety and quality of their foods 
entering international trade, and to ensure that imported foods conform to national 
requirements. The new global environment for food trade places considerable obligations 
on both importing and exporting countries to strengthen their food control systems 
and to implement and enforce risk-based food control strategies. In many countries, 
including the Caribbean islands, effective food control is undermined by the existence of 
fragmented legislation, multiple jurisdictions, and weaknesses in surveillance, monitoring 
and enforcement. Information exchange, technology transfer and capacity building are 
also critical strategies for food security in the Caribbean islands. In the absence of public 
standards (many of which have been adopted from the Codex Alimentarius Commission), 
farmers should be encouraged to apply voluntary standards such as Good Agricultural 
Practices (GAPs) while manufacturers and food processors should adhere to current Good 
Manufacturing Practices (GMPs). Farmers and food processors targeting export markets 
however, must ensure compliance with the laws of the exporting country and may be forced 
to adopt private standards to gain entry into the foreign markets. Governments, on the other 
hand must demonstrate the political will, through the provision of regulatory, financial, 
technical and infrastructural support mechanisms to assist farmers and food producers.
 In the case of Trinidad and Tobago, the annual food import bill in 2013 was estimated 
at TT$4 billion (approx.US$620.2 million).  Imports of food and beverages into Trinidad 
and Tobago fall under the Food and Drugs Act of 1960. Additional laws for fish and fish 
products were incorporated into the Food and Drugs Act, while amendments were made for 
alcoholic beverages and other products. The Chemistry, Food and Drugs Division (CFDD) 
falls within the purview of the Ministry of Health, which also enforces some components 
of the Pesticides and Toxic Chemicals Act. Most of the food safety laws are outdated and 
while revisions have been made, many are still in the drafting stage, and have not been 
proclaimed into law. The Ministry of Food Production administers the laws regulating 
Plant and Animal controls. Table 7.6 illustrates the legislation under which food safety is 
monitored and enforced in Trinidad and Tobago. 
The regulatory climate is changing very rapidly, and regional countries need to ensure 
regulations are updated and enforced related to both the importation and exportation of 
236 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
food. The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) passed by congress in the USA on 4 
January 2011, represented a significant event for the US Food and Drug Association (FDA). 
The FSMA allows the FDA to enforce more stringent compliance regulations and equips 
manufacturing and distribution companies with better response strategies to problems as 
they occur. Furthermore, the act extends to creating a uniform standard for imported foods 
to match those of domestically produced foods within the US. With limited exceptions, 
the rule would require domestic and foreign facilities that manufacture, process, pack, or 
hold human food to have written plans that identify hazards, specify the steps that will be 
put in place to minimize or prevent such hazards. In addition, manufacturers will be able 
to identify monitoring procedures, record monitoring results, and specify what actions 
should be taken to correct problems that arise. The FDA evaluates the plans developed, and 
continues to inspect the facilities to make sure the plans are being properly implemented.
Table 7.6: Current gaps in existing legislation governing food safety in 
Trinidad and Tobago
Legislation Current gaps in existing legislation related to food safety
• Plant Protection Act • Understanding the sanitary and phyto-sanitary requirements 
13 of 1975 for the export markets and the application of non-chemical 
• Registration of Plant pest control practices are necessary to maintain food safety 
Varieties Act (1997) requirements. 
• There are no legal requirements for maximum residue levels 
(MRLs) of chemicals, traceability nor farm certification systems. 
• Limited efforts at capacity building in GAPs and farm registration 
are currently undertaken by the National Agricultural Marketing 
and Development Corporation (NAMDEVCO) in Trinidad. 
• Laboratory upgrade of infrastructure is required.
• Animal (Diseases • Update legislation on importation of animals and animal 
and Importation) products. 
Act, Chapter 67:02, • Licensing and regulation of veterinarians is needed.
Act 19 of 1954, 
amended by Act 17 •  Training in the diagnosis of diseases related to animals, bees, etc. 
of 1997 • Licensing requirements for the operation of bee hives, poultry 
• Conservation of depots, and livestock units. 
Wildlife Act, Chapter • Laboratory upgrade of infrastructure is necessary.
67:01, Act 16 of 
1956, amended by 
Act 14 of 1963
| 237
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Legislation Current gaps in existing legislation related to food safety
• Fisheries Act, Chapter • This will be superseded by the Fisheries Management Bill, 2011 
67:51, Act 39 of 1916, and provides a more controlled access to the fisheries resources 
amended by Act 23 of of Trinidad and Tobago. 
1975. • There is need to address the importation of live and processed 
fish and certification systems such as GMPs and HACCP. 
• Laboratory upgrade of infrastructure is required.
• Food and Drugs, • Regulations need to address GMPs, HACCP and FSMA for 
Chapter 30:01, Act manufacturing facilities and particularly for meat and dairy 
8 of 1960 updated products. Same with import/export of products.
December 2007 •  Public health inspectors do not have authority to close non-
• Public Health compliant plants nor retail markets.
Ordinance (1917, • No legislation with respect to levels of chemicals and mixtures 
adjusted in 1950s) of chemicals that farmers can use on crops. 
• Pesticides, Toxic • No residue (MRLs) testing, nor penalties for use of banned 
Chemical Act of 1979 chemicals. 
• No legislation for organic farming.  
Food traceability systems
Food traceability according to Alli (2012),  can be defined as the identification of the origin, 
past or current location, condition and application of an item’s known history throughout 
the supply chain, or the tracking of a food item forwards or backwards throughout the food 
supply chain from farm to table. Tracking (forward) is following the path of a traceable 
item through supply chain as it moves between parties. Tracing (back) is identifying the 
origin, attributes, or history of a traceable item located within the supply chain in order to 
improve food safety and reduce the potential of food recalls. Traceability systems from farm 
to fork should be implemented and some of the key steps in implementing such a system 
include: identifying key items that are traceable, determining for each item what details 
are required, developing a record keeping system, and developing an internal traceability 
programme. The benefits of such a system include:
• compliance with best practices worldwide
• risk reduction of unsafe foods to the consumer 
• consumer confidence (assurance that foods are safe and wholesome)
• reduced costs, improved marketability and more competitive businesses both in 
local and foreign markets
238 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
• decrease in food borne illnesses 
• faster recall of foods from the supply chain (production, processing, distribution, 
transport, retail and consumer). 
Looking forward
To remain competitive in today’s global business environment a thorough understanding 
of all parts of the agri-food value chain is important (Devanney, 2006). However as value 
chains become sophisticated and vital to the competitiveness of many industries, this 
interlinked, global nature also makes them increasingly vulnerable to a range of risks. To 
ensure long-term food security under constantly changing agro-ecological and environmental 
conditions, considerations should be given to the implementation of sustainable agricultural 
practices such as:
• plant genetic resources which are resilient to climate change and pests and diseases 
through genetic manipulation, for example, the insertion of a gene for herbicide 
resistance or another for resistance to pest-insect toxin.
• identifying and developing alternatives to chemical methods for the control of 
postharvest pathogens and pests such as the reinforcement of host resistance, 
biological control and applications of physical treatments. 
• reducing risks associated with potential microbiological outbreaks of human 
pathogens that may reside on produce utilising novel methods to sanitise produce.
• exporting sensitive produce by sea under controlled conditions in order to reduce 
environmental problems and costs associated with air transportation must be 
considered. 
• recycling of bio-waste for energy, feed and fertilizer can reduce the environmental 
impact. 
In the area of biotechnology, the next decade will see the development of combinations 
of desirable traits and the introduction of new traits such as drought tolerance for climate 
change mitigation effects. The production of cloned animals with engineered, innate 
immunity to diseases that reduce production efficiency will have the potential to reduce 
substantial losses arising from mortality and subclinical infections. Biotechnology could 
also be used to produce plants for animal feed with modified composition that increase the 
efficiency of meat production and lower methane emissions. While the use of biotechnology 
can lead to improved food safety through reducing pesticide use and improving postharvest 
quality of crops, the issue of trust and public acceptance of the technology has been 
highlighted in debates over the acceptance of genetic modification (GM) technologies. This 
| 239
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
technology may also pose health risks due to the possible transfer of toxins and allergens 
between species as GM involves germline modification of an organism and its introduction 
to the environment and food chain. Thus, a number of particular environmental and food 
safety issues will need to be assessed  (for example FAO 2001; Godfray et al. 2010).
Many effective options are available for reducing the polluting and degrading effect and 
food safety risks associated with agricultural production practices. An increase in education 
and awareness among food products is only one small aspect in the fight to mitigate 
agricultural pollution and food safety concerns. It is essential that environmental policies 
and relevant legislation be put in place to combat these existing problems. The policies 
and legislation must be in sync with the scientific and technical options, some of which 
are provided in this chapter for consideration. It is to be noted that many of the available 
options are associated with some direct costs, however these immediate cost should be 
viewed as an investment that will yield long-term benefits.
REFERENCES 
Alexandratos, N. 1998. World Food and Agriculture: the outlook for year 2010. In: 
Proceedings of the FAO/IFA/IFDC informal meeting on fertilizer use by crop, Rome, 
Italy.
Alli, I. 2012. Doing Business in Canada: Opportunities, Challenges and the Regulatory 
Environment and Risk and Traceability. Seminar hosted by the FBIDC, Crowne Plaza, 
Trinidad. http://www.foodandbeveragett.com/the-fbidc-hosts-two-day-seminar-
series/#sthash.BCJIQ4AV.dpuf.
Bruulsema, T. 2009. Recommendation Development under 4R Nutrient Stewardship. 
Proceedings North Central Extension-Industry Soil Fertility Conference 25. Des 
Moines, Iowa.
Cai, D.W. 2008. Understand the Role of Chemical Pesticides and Prevent Misuses of 
Pesticides. Bulletin of Agricultural Science and Technology 1:36–38.
Charles J., H. Godfray, J.R. Beddington, I.R. Crute, L. Haddad, D. Lawrence, J.F. Muir, J. 
Pretty, S. Robinson, S.M., Thomas and C. Toulmin. 2010. Food Security: The Challenge 
of Feeding 9 Billion People. Science 327: 812.
Chowdary, V.M., S. Yatindranath, S. Kar and S. Adiga. 2001. Assessment of Non-Point 
Source of Pollution on Watershed Basis Using Remote Sensing, GIS and AGNPS Model. 
Proceedings 22nd Asian Conference on Remote Sensing, Singapore. 
Devanney, M. 2006. The	Benefits	of	Agri-Food	Value	Chains. Nova Scotia: Department of 
Agriculture/Aquaculture and Fisheries.  
240 |
Sustaining the Environment: Farm and Beyond the Farm
Eleftherohorinos, I.G. Weed Science. 2008. Weeds, Herbicides, Environment, and Methods 
for Weed Management. Athens, Greece: AgroTypos.
European Commission. 2002. Risk Profile on the Microbiological Contamination of Fruits 
and Vegetables Eaten Raw. Report of the Scientific Committee on Food, Belgium. http://
europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scf/index_en.html 
FAO. 2001. A Status Note on Food Safety.  Report from the Standing Committee on Priorities 
and Strategies (SCOPAS).  TAC secretariat. Food and Agriculture Organization of the 
United Nations Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research Technical 
Advisory Committee.
FAO, IICA. 2011. The Outlook for Agriculture and Rural Development in the Americas: A 
Perspective on Latin America and the Caribbean.
Frink, C.R., P.E. Waggoner and J.H. Ausubel. 1999. Nitrogen Fertilizer: Retrospect and 
Prospect. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Conference. 
Godfray, H.C.J., J.R. Beddington, I.R. Crute, L. Haddad, D. Lawrence, J.F. Muir, J. Pretty, 
S. Robinson, S.M. Thomas and C. Toulmin. 2010. Food Security: The Challenge of 
Feeding 9 Billion People. Science 327:812–18.
Groffman, P.M., E.A. Axelrod, J.L. Lemunyon and M. Sullivan. 1991. Denitrification in Grass 
and Forest Vegetated Filter Strips. J. Environ. Qual. 20:671–74.
Halden R.U., and K.J. Schwab. 2010. Environmental Impact of Industrial Farm Animal 
Production. A Report of the PEW Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production. 
http://www.ncifap.org/_images/212-4_EnvImpact_tc_Final.pdf.
Kamrin, M.A. 1997. Pesticide Profiles: Toxicity, Environmental Impact and Fate. Boca 
Raton: CRC Press LLC.
Kemper, D., S. Dabney, L. Kramer, D. Dominick and T. Keep.  1992. Hedging against Erosion. 
J. Soil Water Conserv. 47:284–88.
LPES. 2005. Livestock and Poultry Environmental Stewardship Curriculum: A National 
Educational Program. http://www.lpes.org/Lessons/Lessons01/1_Environmental_
Stewardship.html.
McBride, D.K. 1989. Managing Pesticides to Prevent Groundwater Contamination. North 
Dakota: North Dakota State University Extension Service publication no. E-979.
Melville, N., and R.P.C. Morgan. 2001. The Influence of Grass Density on Effectiveness of 
Contour Grass Strips for Control of Soil Erosion on Low Angle Slopes. Soil Use Manage. 
17:278–81.
Meyer, L.D., S.M. Dabney and W.C. Harmon. 1995. Sediment-trapping Effectiveness of 
Stiff-Grass Hedges. Trans. ASAE 38:809–815.
Oldemann L.R., R.T.A. Hakkeling and W.C. Sombroek. 1991. World Map of the Status of 
Human-Induced Soil Degradation: An Explanatory Note. 2nd ed.  Wageningen and 
| 241
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Nairobi: International Soil Reference and Information Centre and United Nations 
Environment Programme.
Payraudeau, S., and H.M.G. van der Werf. 2005. Environmental Impact Assessment for 
a Farming Region: A Review of Methods. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 
107, no. 1:1–19.
Pluncknett, D. 1995. Prospects of Meeting Future Food Needs through New Technology. 
In Population	and	Food	in	the	Early	Twenty-first	Century, ed. Nurul Islam, 207–220. 
Washington DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
Polimeni, J.M., R.I. Iorgulescu and M. Bălan. 2013. Food Safety, Food Security and 
Environmental Risks. Internal Auditing & Risk Management 1, no. 29:53–68.
Richter, E.D. 2002. Acute Human Poisonings. In Encyclopaedia of Pest Management, ed. 
D. Pimentel, 3–6. New York: Dekker.
Steinfeld, H., P. Gerber, T. Wassenaar, V. Castel, M. Rosales and C. de Haan.  2006. 
Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options. Rome, Italy: Food and 
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
World Health Organization. 2004. Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard 
and Guidelines to Classification. Corrigenda, Geneva: World Health Organization, IPCS.
Yannawar, V.B., and A.B. Bhosle. 2013. Cultural Eutrophication of Lonar Lake, Maharashtra, 
India. International Journal of Innovation and Applied Studies 3, no. 2:504–510.
Zhang, W.J., F.B. Jiang and J.F. Ou. 2011. Global Pesticide Consumption and Pollution: 
With China as a Focus. Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and 
Environmental Sciences 1, no. 2:125–44.
242 |
Appropriate Logistics to Reduce 
Losses in the Postharvest 
Handling System: Case of Mango
Majeed Mohammed
Fresh fruits and vegetables undergo continuous changes throughout the 
supply chain, from the point of harvest until consumption. As such, the 
postharvest handling logistics of these commodities are different from those 
of other food products. Because of their living and perishable nature, fresh 
commodities are subject to biochemical and physiological changes resulting 
in deterioration over time as the commodity moves along the postharvest 
handling system (Figure 8.1).
The quality of freshly harvested fruits and vegetables is determined by 
biological variations, environmental conditions, handling methods and 
sanitation practices. These parameters are further influenced by logistic activities 
such as the type of packaging, loading and unloading activities, availability 
of temperature controlled transport vehicles, storage facilities and the types 
of postharvest treatments that are implemented (Mazini and Accorsi 2013). 
Figure 8.1: Postharvest handling operations and value chain for 
mango
 
C H A P T E R  EIGHT
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
While these postharvest activities cannot stop the rate of quality deterioration, they can 
impact the speed of quality loss by either slowing down the process via low, safe non-chilling 
temperature and high relative humidity, or speed it up by abusive handling whereby physical 
damages are incurred. Accordingly, the perception of product quality in the supply chain 
cannot be solely restricted to the properties of the commodity but also to the supply chain 
agents, processes and activities along the supply chain.  Time and coordination are required 
to efficiently move perishable fruits and vegetables along the postharvest handling system, 
every delay can have negative quality consequences. In many countries, a high percentage 
of produce losses occur before fresh commodities reach the targeted consumers.  Fonseca 
and Vergara (2014) estimated that postharvest losses can range from 37 percent for roots 
and tubers to 50 percent for fruit and vegetables.  Such high losses compromise the income 
to producers and handlers, and eventually increase costs to consumers, thereby impacting 
household food security.
Pullman and Zhaohui (2012) emphasised that in order to combat losses of horticultural 
commodities and their subsequent impact on the well-being of societies, efficient logistics 
systems need to be established to deliver the right product at the appropriate time. Logistics, 
according to Fonseca and Vergara (2014), are fundamental for horticultural products as 
their high perishability requires complex planning, including short-term decisions on 
transportation modes, handling, packaging and storage arrangements.  To ensure fresh 
commodities do not become damaged or compromised throughout the postharvest handling 
system there must be a greater reliance on maintaining the cold chain. This involves the 
movement of temperature sensitive commodities along a supply chain through thermal 
and refrigerated packaging methods, and the logistical planning to protect the integrity of 
these perishable commodities. The cold chain therefore can be considered: 
• A science, because it requires an understanding of the chemical and biological 
processes linked with perishability. 
• A technology, since it relies on physical means to ensure appropriate temperature 
conditions along the supply chain. 
• A process, because of the series of tasks must be performed to prepare, store, 
transport and monitor commodities that are sensitive to chilling injury and heat 
injury.
244 |
Appropriate Logistics to Reduce Losses in the Postharvest Handling System: Case of Mango
Logistics performance
In Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), trade globalization has become a challenge 
for logistic operations in the fresh produce industry (Fonseca and Vergara 2014).  Currently 
all LAC countries engage in importing some portion of the fresh produce they consume. 
While the USA is the dominant trading market for export commodities from LAC, it is 
also the largest hub for the re-shipping of consignments from and to other regions.  For 
example, pineapples shipped from LAC to the Caribbean normally enter a seaport in USA, 
which means that LAC produce is in transit for long distances before getting to its final 
destination (Duran Lima and Lo Turco 2010). Unless logistics operations are optimized, long 
travelling distances increase the risk of low shelf life in imported produce when it arrives 
at the destination market (Fonseca and Vergara 2014). In LAC, the transformation of retail 
marketing of fresh produce has impacted on logistics as well. Development of supermarkets 
with distribution centres or market chains continue to grow, accounting for more share 
of the retail market for fresh produce in the region. Supermarkets and associated chain 
stores have adopted strict quality parameters which have ultimately created the need for 
improved logistics necessary to reduce losses during transit. At the same time, these high 
stringent quality standards have also influenced a higher risk of losses from rejections due 
to unacceptable quality (Lundqvist, De Fraiture and Molden 2008).
Logistic challenges and interventions
The following is a list of limitations in logistic operations in LAC for which key interventions 
are required in order to address the problems associated with high postharvest losses:
a. Inadequate infrastructure for proper coordination of postharvest activities, this is 
primarily  due to underdeveloped secondary and tertiary roads often punctuated 
with potholes, slippery surfaces (especially in the wet season), and unpaved 
surfaces which lead to extensive physical damage such as abrasions, compressions, 
punctures, which create avenues for secondary infections. Adequate facilities 
to pre-cool, sort, grade, apply post-harvest treatments, along with storage and 
packaging, have also been found to be wanting. Levels of physical and pathological 
defects of mango fruits when subjected to grading requirement and tolerance are 
classified in Table 8.1.
b. Limited information and communication technologies and their application – these 
also represent a major constraint to the growth and competiveness of the fresh 
produce industry throughout the region, particularly in rural areas.  
| 245
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Table 8.1: Mango fruit grading protocols
Grade 
Grade requirements Grade tolerances
designation
1 2 3
Extra class Mangoes must be of superior quality.   5 percent by number of weight 
They must be characteristic of the of mangoes not satisfying the 
variety.  They must be free of defects, requirements for the grade, 
with the exception of very slight but meeting those of Class I or 
superficial defects, provided these do exceptional, coming within the 
not affect the general appearances of tolerances of that grade.
the fruit.
Class I Mangoes must be of good quality and 10 percent by number or weight 
characteristic of the variety.  Mangoes of mangoes not satisfying the 
may have the following slight defects, requirements for the grade, but 
provided these do not affect the general meeting those of Class II grade or, 
appearance of the produce, the quality, exceptional, coming within the 
the keeping quality and presentation in tolerances of that grade.  
the package:
-  slight defects in shape; or
- slight skin defects due to rubbing or 
sunburn, suberized stains due to resin 
exudation (elongated trails included) 
and healed bruises not exceeding 2,3,4,5 
sq.cm. for size groups A, B, C, and D 
respectively
Class II The grade includes mangoes which do 10 percent by number or weight 
not qualify for inclusion in the higher of mangoes not satisfying the 
grades, but satisfy the minimum requirements of the grade, 
requirements.  Mangoes may have but meeting the minimum 
the following defects, provided they requirements.
retain their essential characteristics as 
regards the quality, keeping quality and 
presentation:
-  defects in shape; or
- slight skin defects due to rubbing or 
sunburn, suberized stains due to resin 
exudation (elongated trails included) 
and healed bruises not exceeding 
4,5,6,7 sq. cm for size groups A, B, C, D 
respectively.
246 |
Appropriate Logistics to Reduce Losses in the Postharvest Handling System: Case of Mango
c. Inadequate cold chain facilities – fresh produce demands proper temperature and 
relative humidity management in the entire logistic process. The development of 
telecommunication, information technology and information systems, especially 
the rise of wireless sensing technologies such as Radio Frequency Identification 
(RFID) and wireless sensors, provide a feasible way to improve the safety and 
quality of cold chain facilities. Integrating RFID systems with conditions-
monitoring systems will also enhance existing track and trace applications, not 
only in terms of the location and movement history, but more importantly, as it 
relates to the condition of perishable commodities. Moreover, the availability of 
commodity-trace history data in combination with historical monitoring data can 
facilitate numerous decision-making processes. 
d. Lack of trained human capital – particularly to determine rejections arising from 
inappropriate harvesting and handling protocols due to overexposure of chilling 
sensitive commodities to extremely low temperatures, as well as the use of unsanitized 
water to wash and hydro-cool fruits and vegetables.  Such problems can arise where 
there are untrained personnel working at different points in the postharvest handling 
system. Logistic service providers often lack sufficient knowledge in the postharvest 
handling of horticultural commodities. Further, many produce managers employed 
at supermarkets lack training in logistics concepts and procedures, which may in turn 
limit their ability to design appropriate solutions to store and transport commodities 
in an efficient manner (Rodriguez and Respetto 2013).
Logistics planning and management
A logistical system is composed of a number of elements which have to be managed 
properly in order to deliver final products in the right quantities at the right time and 
quality at the right place, and at a reasonable cost. This puts challenging requirements on 
the agro-food chain (Van der Vorst, Silva and Trienekens 2007) and there is need to make 
the specific  logistics decision in order to meet customer expectations. For example, whilst 
temperature and relative humidity are critical factors affecting fruit quality (Kader, 2002), 
logistics decisions heavily determine these conditions by defining storage time and time of 
transporting perishable commodities (Luning and Marcelis 2007).
Integration of quality control and logistics control
All logistics activities are dependent on time-dependent product information  obtained 
through quality control activities. Time-dependent quality information of product properties 
could assist in ensuring that products reach intended consumers before the development 
| 247
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
of defects. Thus, a higher level of integration of quality control and logistics control is 
required to predict incidences of fruit defects as well as to encourage exchange of quality 
information in the chain and the level of flexibility of the delivery systems to match specific 
consumer requirements. In underscoring the importance of quality control and logistics in 
the postharvest handling of fruit and vegetables, a detailed examination of these systems 
in mango will now follow.
Quality control and logistics control in postharvest 
handling system of mango
Pre-harvest factors 
Varietal differences, growing regions, climatic conditions and agronomic practices 
influence the expression of fruit maturity in all commodities including mango, with the 
stage maturity at the time of harvest also being crucial to the eating quality of the ripe fruit 
(Figure 8.2 and 8.3). Therefore, selection of the appropriate mature fruit at harvest is based 
on several parameters such as fruit shape, peel colour, peel texture, flesh firmness, flesh 
colour development, soluble solids content and latex content.  As such, it is important that 
mango producers validate those parameters that are most effective and dependable for 
their own conditions (Brecht 2010). 
Harvesting and maturation indices
Knowledge of the maturity indices of the particular cultivar will enable harvesters to 
determine the best time to harvest fruits. Logistical arrangements to speed up the harvesting 
process will depend on availability of harvest aids such as ladders, clippers, nets, and 
harvest baskets.  While harvesting mangoes at the optimum stage of physiological maturity 
facilitates synchronised ripening, the use of the correct harvesting aids ensures minimal 
physical damage and lower postharvest losses. 
Protection of harvested fruits from exposure to direct sunlight while awaiting transport to 
packinghouses, which can vary from half an hour to six hours, is critical in order to maintain 
fruit quality.  Direct exposure to sunlight for prolonged periods of more than six hours results 
in higher flesh temperatures, thereby increasing the rate of respiration, transpiration and 
ethylene production, all of which have the potential to shorten the shelf life. 
Latex exudation from mango stems at the time of harvest (Figure 8.4 ) can cause severe 
skin injury and staining, along with blister formation when fruits are subsequently ripened, 
resulting in unacceptable cosmetic appeal (Figure 8.4). Latex stains are aggravated when 
mangoes are exposed to heat and timely logistical procedures must be implemented to 
avoid this damage to fruits. To avoid latex damage of mango fruits in Brazil for example 
(Brecht 2010), mango producers train their harvesting crew to harvest mangoes with stems 
248 |
Appropriate Logistics to Reduce Losses in the Postharvest Handling System: Case of Mango
over 5 cm in length and immediately transport them to packinghouses where the stems are 
trimmed after 12–24 hours.  This procedure ensures that latex drip would no longer occur 
even if the stem is clipped shorter. Other suggested methods include: de-sapping in a one 
percent solution of calcium hydroxide; washing fruit in one percent potassium sulphate; 
applying a surface coating to fruit prior to de-sapping; trimming and de-sapping at the 
packinghouse, followed by inversion on a stationary rack or a roller-conveyor; running 
below water or water and detergent sprays for 20 minutes (Yahia 2011).
Transport from field to packinghouse
It is best to transport mangoes using trucks or pick-up vans that allow air circulation 
as the vehicle moves from the field to the packing house. To minimise physical damages 
(Figure 8.5), harvested fruits should be carefully placed in light coloured plastic crates that 
are stackable and well ventilated.  Vehicle loads must be protected from sunlight by covering 
the top layers of mangoes with a light coloured tarpaulin. This will reduce respiration and 
water loss resulting in longer shelf-life. In some Caribbean islands the national marketing 
boards provide refrigerated transport from the field to packing houses for a small fee. 
Refrigerated transport would initiate pre-cooling and further reduce respiration and water 
loss once accompanied by a relative humidity of 90–95 percent. 
Alternatively, logistical arrangements to facilitate early morning, late evening or night 
time harvesting, loading and unloading operations and transport from field to packing house 
would also favour lower fruit temperatures that can better preserve the quality and shelf life 
of mango fruits.  Equally important, is the need to have timely, well-coordinated schedules 
to allow for controlled quantities of mangoes to be delivered to the reception area at the 
packinghouse. If mango loads exceed the capacity of the reception lines then it will take a 
longer period for fruits to be unloaded on the reception lines. When mangoes, which have a 
climacteric pattern of respiration are exposed to high ambient temperatures are subjected 
to delays prior to unloading on packing lines, they would incur losses in quality due to 
accelerated respiration, ethylene production and transpiration rates. A smooth, timely flow 
of mango fruits from the field and rapid unloading onto reception lines requires logistical 
procedures to be programmed, monitored, controlled and expedited in an efficient manner.
Pre-packing house logistics
Optimizing the use of space in the packing house as well as the efficiency of resources 
on the mango reception line is critical for quality maintenance. A large unloading area 
would cater for more transport vehicles with fruits to be unloaded in a shorter time period. 
Packinghouses with large, open unloading areas have less traffic congestion and also provide 
protection of mango fruits against sunlight, and inadequate ventilation.  They also make 
| 249
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
representative sampling and inspections for quarantine and quality control purposes more 
effective. Minimizing delays wherever possible is essential, as mango fruits are known to 
undergo rapid compositional changes in the hours following harvest (Brecht 2010). 
Major changes in total soluble solids (TSS) content, flesh firmness, skin and flesh colour 
can be manifested in mangoes as little as 24 hours after harvest. According to Brecht (2010), 
a 24-hour wait period prior to heat treatment of mango resulted in a reduction of heat 
injury symptoms.  Furthermore, a time delay prior to heat treatment can be beneficial for 
low maturity mangoes.  Average maturity, based on internal flesh colour, can be changed 
by one full stage in 24 hours under typical ambient temperatures, and TSS can increase 
by two to three percent, while flesh firmness decreases by two to five pounds force (lb/f ) 
according to Brecht (2010).
Packing house sanitation protocols
Regular monitoring and application of sanitation protocols of packinghouse equipment 
and facilities must be implemented. Containers, packing line equipment (sorters, graders, 
dryers), refrigeration units, transport vehicles, forklifts and floors must be sanitised using 
a chlorine solution of 200 ppm between 25 and 43°C, and adjusted to a pH 7 with citric or 
acetic acid. Pets, rodents, birds and insects must be excluded from all areas. 
Packing house post-harvest treatments logistics
Temporary storage of mangoes in the shade prior to unloading on packing lines should 
be implemented. Fruits exposed to the sun in excess of 1 hour can be 14°C higher than fruits 
held in the shade, thereby resulting in heat injury. Likewise, flesh temperatures above 30°C 
for extended periods after harvest will result in poor ripening and flavour.
Hot water treatment  
Hot water treatment (HWT) is recommended for mango fruits as an effective post-
harvest treatment to minimise fruit fly damage and the fungal disease Anthracnose. 
There are specific requirements for successful hot water treatment of mangoes. Fruits are 
immersed in hot water at 46°C, with the time interval varying according to fruit shape and 
fruit weight.  For example, mangoes with a round shape (e.g., Tommy Atkins, Haden, Keitt 
and Kent), weighing less than 500g will require 75 minutes, fruits between 501 and 700g 
need 90 minutes, while fruits between 701 and 900g will need 110 minutes.  Mangoes with a 
flat shape such as Manila and Frances and weighing less than 375g require 65 minutes, and 
those weighing 376–570g need 75 minutes (USDA 2010). Accordingly, logistical protocols 
must be instituted to ensure that mangoes are graded by weight and size prior to hot water 
treatment in order to control fruit fly and at the same time to reduce fruit injury. 
250 |
Appropriate Logistics to Reduce Losses in the Postharvest Handling System: Case of Mango
Furthermore, packing house managers should advise packing line operators on certain 
strategies that could improve the hot water treatment and overall fruit quality. Brecht 
(2010) has identified these as: 
1. allowing only mature fruits to be given the treatment since immature mangoes are 
more susceptible to damage by hot water;
2. eliminating latex contact with fruit surfaces during harvest since latex damage is 
accelerated by hot water;
3. using potable water only, or sanitized water the first time the water is heated; and 
4. improving temperature control in hot water tanks to allow treatment at the lowest 
allowable temperature since even 0.5°C  above the required temperature could 
make a difference in fruit tolerance. 
Post-hot water treatment cooling
Hydro-cooling mangoes after hot water treatment decreases flesh temperature more 
rapidly than holding in air, thereby reducing hot water injury. This pre-cooling treatment 
requires specific time-temperature procedures. For example, mangoes should be hydro-
cooled immediately after heat treatment, by adding an additional 10 minutes to the hot 
water protocol.  The hydro-cooled water temperature must be maintained at 21–22°C, and 
the duration of hydro-cooling should allow fruit flesh temperature to be between 27 and 
29°C. Sanitizer levels in the hydro-cooled water should be maintained, such that effective 
free chlorine is 50–100ppm (Brecht 2010).  Hydro-cooled mangoes must be immediately 
packed to minimize re-warming of fruits. 
Sorting and grading
Sorting and grading must be done to remove fruits with physical injuries, incipient decay, 
misshapen fruits, and fruits with physiological disorders, such as heat injury or internal 
breakdown, lenticel damage and surface scald. Grading mangoes provides the following 
advantages. It:
• provides common basis for assessment by all, and is therefore beneficial to the 
producers, traders as well as to the consumers;
• enables producers to get a better price for their mangoes;
• assists producers and other intermediaries in preparing fresh mangoes for market 
with appropriate labelling;
• helps consumers to get standard, quality mangoes at fair prices;
• allows consumers to compare the prices of different qualities of mango in the market;
| 251
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
• assures quality of the mangoes and also reduces cost of marketing and transportation;
• enables mangoes of similar grade can be stored in bulk;
• facilitates a better understanding of market values;
• enables e-trading so that mangoes can be bought and sold without inspection;  
• provides an authentic and scientific basis for promoting and managing marketing 
systems;
• serves as a realistic and common basis for market intelligence and reporting.
Waxing
Brecht (2010) recommended waxing of mangoes due to the resultant improvement of 
appearance, glossiness, and reduced water loss, but cautioned about the need for uniform 
wax distribution and wax formulation strength. For example, application of full-strength 
carnauba-based wax can induce lenticel damage on immature mangoes as well as peel 
damage, which could develop after a period of refrigerated storage and transport. The use 
of water-soluble coatings ought to be avoided since this can be dissolved during subsequent 
handling when condensation occurs, if and when cold fruits are subjected to warmer 
temperatures.
Packaging and palletisation
Mangoes should be packed in single layered, one or two-piece full telescopic, self-locking 
fibreboard cartons with bursting strength requirements of 250–275lb/in2 ).  Ventilation and 
handle holes are recommended to provide adequate ventilation and for ease of handling. 
A layer of shredded paper at the base of the carton is desirable to assist in cushioning the 
fruits. Each alternate mango in a carton should be wrapped in tissue to reduce fruit to fruit 
rubbing.  Small identity labels attached to alternate fruit will enhance product presentation. 
Palletisation is essential to minimise fruit damage due to multiple handling, and can also aid in 
the movement of fruit within the packinghouse, or during temporary storage (Medlicott 1990).
Storage and ripening
Attention to strict logistical procedures is necessary to optimize the ripening of mangoes. 
Although fruit ripening varies according to the variety and origin, a temperature of 20–22°C 
and 90–95 percent relative humidity is recommended. It must be noted however, that 
ripening at 15.5–18°C may result in the most attractive skin colour, but the flavour will 
remain tart and the mangoes will require a further two to three days at 21–24°C to attain 
a sweet flavour. Ripening at 27–30°C may result in mottled skin and strong flavour, and is 
retarded above 30°C.  Initiation and synchronisation of ripening and a shortening of the 
252 |
Appropriate Logistics to Reduce Losses in the Postharvest Handling System: Case of Mango
ripening time of mangoes can be achieved with exposure to ethylene gas. Treatment with 
ethylene gas is carried out in an air-tight room for 24 hours at 20–25°C and 90–95 percent 
relative humidity.  The concentration of gas required during exposure is 10–100ppm. Air-
tight rooms should have adequate air circulation to enable uniform distribution of ethylene 
throughout the room.
Prolonged storage of more than three to five days should not be used for fruits to be air-
freighted. At storage temperatures below 12°C, unripe mangoes will develop chilling injury, 
which will cause a drastic reduction in fruit quality and increase spoilage. Symptoms of 
chilling injury include inhibition of ripening, pitting, internal discolouration, grey, scald-
like discolouration of the skin, increased water loss, increased susceptibility to decay and 
undesirable changes to flavour. Chilling injury can be reversed if the time of holding at 
low temperature is prolonged.  Variations exist in the degree of sensitivity of the different 
cultivars to chilling injury. 
While most cultivars show injury below 10°C, if fruit have just reached maturity, tolerance 
to chilling injury increases as fruit ripen (Mohammed and Brecht, 2002). Other measures 
include maintenance in modified /controlled atmospheres, and conditioning at high 
temperatures (35–38°C) for a few hours before storage at low temperature. Chilling injury 
symptoms for example in cv. Keitt mangoes kept at 38°C for zero, 24 or 48 hours before 
storage at 5°C for 11 days decreased with increased duration at 38°C, while non-heated fruit 
developed severe chilling injury symptoms (McCollum, D’Aquino and McDonald  1993).
Storage at 12°C and 90–95 percent  relative humidity will maintain mangoes in an acceptable 
condition, and they will ripen in a satisfactory manner on transfer to warmer temperatures. 
This however will depend on variety, harvest maturity and the time of harvest in the season.
 Strict levels of quality control in fruit stored at low temperature is essential, as blemishes, 
bruises, and infections will manifest themselves to a greater degree as against when the fruit 
is exported by air, and marketed rapidly (Medlicott 1986). Flesh firmness is a good indicator 
of the stage of ripeness and can be used for managing mango ripening as shown in Table 8.2.
Table 8.2: Flesh firmness according to stage of ripeness
Ripeness stage Flesh firmness (lb/force) Recommendations
Mature green >14 Treat with ethylene for 48 hours
Partially ripe 10-14 Treat with ethylene for 24 hours
Firm ripe 6-10 Best stage to send to retail stores
Soft ripe 2-6 Best stage for eating
Overripe < 2 Good for juice
Source: Brecht (2010)
| 253
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Post-harvest logistics associated with mango weevil 
Mango is the only known host for the mango weevil (Cryptorhynchus mangiferae) which 
is found throughout most mango-growing regions and therefore it is a pest of quarantine 
significance. The weevil is primarily a pest of the seed, with one seed supporting up to five 
larvae, although occasionally it may be found in the flesh of the fruit. Eggs are laid on the 
outside of the developing fruit and the larvae penetrate the young seed, where the weevil 
completes its development (Yahia 2011). Mango oviposition occurs when the fruit is marble 
size, and may occur in less than eight days or up to 90 days (Shukla and Tandom 1985). As 
the fruit matures and the seed covering becomes hard, the first instars will not be able to 
penetrate the endocarp.  Fruits, which fall to the ground, can become sufficiently damaged 
to allow the weevils to move out of the seed and seek hiding places where they can survive 
(Yahia 2011).
Mango seed weevil is an important limiting factor for the international trade of mango 
and prevents the export of fresh fruit to areas not infested with this pest (Figure 8.6). The 
flesh of ripe fruit is damaged when adults emerge from the seeds, and the weevil-damaged 
seeds may limit plant propagation in nurseries and orchards (Yahia 2011). 
Transportation logistics for local, regional and foreign 
markets
Many of the losses that occur during transportation of mango fruits are due to inappropriate 
packaging and box arrangement inside transport vehicles. Common types of mechanical 
damage during transportation or distribution are impact damage through dropping, 
compression damage due to high stacking, punctures from container protrusions, and 
vibration damage (Figure 8.7). Vibration damage of mango fruits results in abrasion marks 
and cuts ranging from light scars to skin removal and possibly some flesh. Compression 
injury of mango fruits is associated with bruises, cracks, splits and deformation. Proper 
packaging and configuration of mango fruits help to immobilize the fruits within the 
container and reduce abrasion injury due to fruit-to-fruit contact during transportation. It 
is also important to stack fruits during transportation and distribution to enable proper air 
circulation to facilitate the removal of heat from the fruits as well as to dissipate incoming 
heat from the atmosphere.
254 |
Appropriate Logistics to Reduce Losses in the Postharvest Handling System: Case of Mango
Figure 8.7: Cause and effect diagram of mango defects 
| 255
	
  	
  
Primary	
  Production	
  Factors	
  	
   Harvesting	
  Factors	
  	
  
Sorting/grading/Packaging	
  	
  and
	
   	
  Postharvest	
  Treatments 	
  
	
   Maturity	
  at	
  Harvest	
  
Manual	
  Harvesting	
  
Temperature	
   Packaging	
   Number	
  of	
  Transfer	
  Weather	
   	
   -­‐physical	
  injury	
  
-­‐Heat	
  Injury	
   Configuration	
   points,	
  drop	
  heights	
  	
  -­‐wind	
  damage	
  
	
   Latex	
  Stains	
  
Harvesting	
  Aid	
  
Fluctuations	
   	
  in	
  soil	
   Pests	
  e.g.	
  seed,	
  
weevil,	
  fruit	
  fly	
   Hot	
  water	
  
Wash	
  with	
  sodium	
  
water	
  content	
  	
  
	
   Temperature	
  	
   treatment	
  
hypochlorite	
  
-­‐Fruit	
  cracking	
  
Handling	
   &	
  R.H.	
  
	
   Abuse	
  	
  
Nutritional	
  deficiency	
   Type	
  of	
  
	
   Fungicidal	
  
Variety	
  Susceptibility	
  to	
   (Macro	
  and	
  Micro Pre-­‐cooling	
   packaging	
  treatment	
  
disease,	
   nutrients)	
  –	
  Ca	
  deficiency	
   Method	
   wooden	
  and	
  	
  
e.g.,.Anthracnose	
   internal	
  breakdown plastic	
  crates	
  
	
   	
  
	
   FRUIT	
  
DEFECTS	
  
St	
  orage	
  Factors	
  
Transportation	
  
Factors	
  
	
   Arrangement	
  of	
  fruit	
  stacks	
  Primary	
  Production	
   Temperature	
  %	
  (too	
  high	
  or	
  too	
  low)	
   Ventilation	
  of	
  Load	
  
Factors	
   and RH	
  
-­‐Nutritiona	
  l	
  Imbalances	
   	
  
-­‐Maturity	
  at	
  Harvest	
  	
  
-­‐Field	
  temperature	
   Ethylene	
  antagonist	
  
Road	
  Conditions	
  	
   Stacking	
  Arrangement	
  
	
  
Temperature	
   Type	
  of	
  Vehicle	
  
Relative	
  Humidity	
  
	
  
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Transportation logistics for local, regional and foreign 
markets
Many of the losses that occur during transportation of mango fruits are due to inappropriate 
packaging and box arrangement inside transport vehicles. Common types of mechanical 
damage during transportation or distribution are impact damage through dropping, 
compression damage due to high stacking, punctures from container protrusions, and 
vibration damage (Figure 8.7). Vibration damage of mango fruits results in abrasion marks 
and cuts ranging from light scars to skin removal and possibly some flesh. Compression 
injury of mango fruits is associated with bruises, cracks, splits and deformation. Proper 
packaging and configuration of mango fruits help to immobilize the fruits within the 
container and reduce abrasion injury due to fruit-to-fruit contact during transportation. It 
is also important to stack fruits during transportation and distribution to enable proper air 
circulation to facilitate the removal of heat from the fruits as well as to dissipate incoming 
heat from the atmosphere.
Mango fruits destined for shipping overseas should always be pre-cooled. Pre-cooling is 
essential to remove field heat, and slow the rate of the various biochemical and physiological 
processes within the fruit, as well as to decrease the refrigeration demand during cold storage 
or refrigerated transport. The selection and use of boxes for marine container shipment of 
mango fruits should include the following logistical procedures:
• corrugated boxes should be strong enough to withstand the effects of high humidity 
during storage and transport;
• boxes must never be stacked beyond edges of pallets;
• pallet loads should be unitized and secured;
• boxes and inner packaging should allow vertical airflow, especially if fruits are 
warmer than  the refrigeration set point temperature when stowed;
• box vents should be aligned between layers of boxes;
• pallets should be used where deck board spacing aligns with box vents;
Thompson et al. (2000) have devised a container loading checklist, applicable to mango 
fruits for export to regional and extra-regional markets.  Steps should be taken to ensure 
that the:
• interior of container is clean and odour-free;
• container is not damaged and door seals are in good repair, and floor drains are open;
• refrigeration unit is operational and the container is cooled to desired loading 
temperature;
256 |
Appropriate Logistics to Reduce Losses in the Postharvest Handling System: Case of Mango
• mango loads are at the specified pulp temperature and properly stowed;
• portable temperature recorder charts are marked with load identification, start 
time and date;
• thermostat is set to the correct temperature and fresh air exchange is set properly;
• security seal is properly attached to rear door of container.
Logistics during processing and development of mango 
value-added products
Fresh-cut technology
The fresh-cut mango industry is developing rapidly throughout the Caribbean. The quality 
of the whole fruit of the fresh mango fruit is an important requirement for maintaining 
the wholesomeness and overall acceptability of fresh-cut mango slices or cubes. Other 
factors include the cultivar, pre-harvest cultural practices and climatic conditions, maturity 
at harvest, method of harvesting, postharvest harvest handling practices cited above, 
time between harvest and preparation of the fresh-cut fruit (Figure 8.8).  The method of 
preparation, such as, sharpness of cutting blade or device, size and surface area of the cut 
pieces, washing, use of sanitizers and removal of surface moisture, and subsequent handling 
conditions (packaging, speed of cooling, maintaining optimum temperature and relative 
humidity, expedited marketing), must also be integrated into the overall quality logistics 
management to attain a high quality product. 
In Trinidad and Tobago for example, the cultivars most suitable for fresh-cut purposes 
are cv. Long, cv. Rose, cv. Tommy Atkins, while in Guyana, it is mainly cv. Buxton spice. 
Regardless of the cultivar used for fresh-cut mango, fruits must be harvested mature-green 
to mature with light yellow flesh colour to ensure better flavour quality. The post-cutting 
life of fresh-cut mango at 5°C is eight to ten days, but depending on the cultivar this could 
be limited by flesh browning and softening (Yahia 2011).  Peeling fruits to a depth of at 
least 2 mm and trimming flesh near the stem could however minimize fruit discolouration 
(Limbanyen, Brecht, Sargent and Bartz 1998).  In other studies, Allong, Wickham and 
Mohammed (2000) indicated that fresh-cut slices from half-ripe (12.5 to 14 percent TSS) 
and firm-ripe (14.5 to 17 percent TSS) cv. Julie and cv. Graham mangoes had a shelf life of 
eight days or four days at 10°C.  Half-ripe (13 to 16 percent Soluble Solids Content) mangoes 
were found to be ideal for fresh-cut in terms of maintenance of acceptable appearance, 
texture, and taste during post-cutting life at 5°C.
A major quality logistics requirement for fresh-cut mangoes is the use of very sharp tools 
to peel fruits and cut flesh into slices or cubes in order to reduce cellular damage and leakage 
| 257
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
of cellular contents and enzymatic browning. Selection of packaging containers is another 
important logistical option. The use of rigid containers reduces water loss and mechanical 
damage during distribution. Shelf life of fresh-cut mango cubes or chunks (Figure 8.9 – 
page 210) is limited by browning and softening, but cubes treated with one percent calcium 
chloride and stored in sealed modified atmospheric packages had a shelf-life of 12 days 
compared to nine days for those dipped in one percent  calcium chloride and stored in 
air.  Sanitation of the whole fruit and the processing equipment, tools and facilities as well 
as the maintenance of a low temperature environment during all fresh-cut process are all 
important to reduce potential microbial problems. 
Value-added products 
Mangoes are processed into several products such as, juices, nectars, jelly powders, fruit 
bars, flakes, dried products, jams, puree, dehydrated products and canned slices. However, 
only about 0.22 percent of mangoes produced in the world are processed (Yahia 2011). 
Green mangoes are processed into pickles, brine stock and chutney (Figure 8.10 – page 
210). There are two classifications of pickles; salt pickles and oil pickles, processed from 
whole and sliced fruit with and without stones. Diverse types of pickles vary mainly in 
the proportions and kinds of spices used in their preparations. The ingredients are mixed 
together and filled into wide-mouthed bottles, and extra oil added to form a 1-2cm layer 
over the pickles (Yahia 2011). Chutney is prepared from peeled, sliced or grated mature or 
semi-ripe mango by cooking the shredded fruit with salt over medium heat for five to seven 
minutes. Sugar, spices and vinegar are added, and cooking is done over moderate heat until 
the product resembles a thick puree.  The remaining ingredients are added and simmered 
for another five minutes, cooled and preserved in sterilized jars. Spices usually include 
cumin seeds, ground cloves, cinnamon, chilli powder, ginger and nutmeg (Yahia 2011). 
Drying procedures such as sun-drying, tunnel drying, vacuum drying, or osmotic 
dehydration can also be applied to sliced mango with or without the peel. However sun 
drying is more popular in most countries because it is inexpensive.  The product is however, 
susceptible to contamination by dirt, insects, rodents and microorganisms. At the same time, 
it must be noted that the process requires several days based on sunlight availability and 
temperature control. More hygienic and equally cost effective systems such as solar dryers 
are available.  These have been adopted by medium to large-scale processors.  Spray-dried 
mango powders are used for flavouring confectionery and pharmaceutical preparations 
as well as in the manufacture of baby foods and tropical fruit drinks which are fortified 
with nutrients to replace those portions lost during processing (Raymundo, Ombico and 
de Villa 2009). 
258 |
Appropriate Logistics to Reduce Losses in the Postharvest Handling System: Case of Mango
The puree of the green mango can also be converted to a powder similar to the puree of ripe 
mangoes by spray drying.  The spray dried powders can then be mixed with other condiments 
and used as a souring agent for some dishes, or as raw material in the manufacture of instant 
green mango shake (University of the Phillipines Los Banos 2005). Edible pulp makes up 
to 33–85 percent of the fresh fruit, while peel and kernel amount to four to seven percent 
and 9–40 percent respectively (Wu, Chen and Fang 1993). By-products of mango may 
amount to 35–60 percent of the total fruit weight. Other parts of the mango fruit are also 
utilized, such as the mango kernels, which are a source of fat, natural antioxidants, starch, 
flour and feed. Studies have been conducted on the peel for possible use in the production 
of biogas, dietary fibre with high antioxidant activity and as a source of pectin (Berardini, 
Knodler and Schieber Carle 2005). 
Logistical factors associated with causes and symptoms 
of defects
Mangoes grown throughout the LAC region are highly susceptible to Anthracnose which 
is caused by a fungus Colletotrichum gloeosporioides (Figure 8.11). Infection occurs during 
flowering and fruit set and its severity increases with high humidity and rainfall. Disease 
symptoms include small, dark spots that become enlarged to irregular, dark brown areas as 
the fruit ripens. Accordingly, the fungus often remains dormant on green fruits and develops 
as the fruit ripens and loses its natural resistance. The timing of pre-havest fungicidal 
treatments is therefore critical in reducing the incidence of this disease (Table 8.3). If this 
is done then consumer satisfaction for disease free fruits will increase and eventually the 
reputation of high quality fruits will impact positively on demand and prices. 
Some cultivars of mango such as cv. Julie and cv. Tommy Atkins are highly susceptible 
to internal physiological disorders in which there is disintegration of the flesh around the 
seed into a jellylike mass. Soft nose also occurs where there is partial ripening of the flesh 
at the distal end of the fruit, with stem-end cavity resulting in necrosis of the flesh around 
the cavity. According to Brecht (2010), some of these disorders can be reduced by increasing 
the calcium content via proper pre-harvest calcium applications (Table 8.3).
| 259
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Table 8.3: Factors influencing pre-harvest and postharvest defects in mango 
fruits
Factors influencing pre-harvest and postharvest fruit defects
Mango defects of pre- Mango defects of harvesting and postharvest
harvest origin handling origin
• Anthracnose • Bruising
• Insect damage • Decay
   (Figure 8.12) • Elevated carbon dioxide injury
• Jelly seed • External (skin) discoloration (due to heat injury or chilling 
• Lenticel damage (spots) injury)
• Misshapen • Immature (poor quality when ripe)
• Scab • Internal (flesh) discoloration (due to heat injury or chilling 
• Scars (russeting) injury)
• Skin breaks and cracks • Not well trimmed (stem is longer than 12.7mm [0.5 inch])
• Soft nose • Overripe (too soft)
• Stem-end cavity • Sapburn
• Sunburn and sunscald • Shrivelling (water loss)
• Bird damage • Sunken discoloured areas ( due to chilling injury)
   (Figure 8.13) • Sunken shoulder areas (due to heat damage to the flesh 
below)
• Uneven (blotchy) ripening (due to heat injury or chilling injury)
• Void spaces in the flesh (due to heat injury or irradiation 
damage)
Logistical demands for mangoes are influenced by their importance as a local and export 
product. Mango fruits harvested at the immature stage can be utilized as a range of value-
added products such as pickles, chutney, amchar, frozen slices and cubes, kuchelar, dried 
products, juices, nectars, canned slices and leathers. Mango fruits that are ripe can be 
eaten as a fresh fruit or in fresh-cut salads, and may also be processed into jams, jellies, 
squash, puree, dehydrated and canned slices. However, these fruits are easily bruised, 
affecting their taste and appearance, thus reducing the selling price. Being perishable, 
mango fruits, which have an average shelf life of two weeks require certain handling and 
storage conditions. The need for logistics management of mango fruits has come to the fore 
following the recent global energy crisis followed by the global financial crisis. Logistics 
management is therefore an important tool to enhance competiveness, while ensuring a 
focus on serviceability. Accordingly, considering the perishable nature of mangoes and 
260 |
Appropriate Logistics to Reduce Losses in the Postharvest Handling System: Case of Mango
how prices correlate to freshness, improvements in the postharvest handling system and 
value-chain must focus on time to market. 
Key factors for the supply of high quality mango include: harvesting fruit at the optimum 
maturity stage for the intended market; careful handling to minimize physical injury; 
treatments for decay control; storing and shipping at the optimum temperature and 
atmosphere to maintain high quality (Yahia 2011). Strategies used to extend the postharvest 
life of mango are based on the proper management of ripening, ethylene production and 
diseases. Research to investigate improved procedures for storage and ripening that would 
allow preconditioned, ripening-initiated, ready-to-eat mangoes for consumers is required. 
Genetic transformation of mango to manipulate the progression and uniformity of ripening 
and softening is also considered a desirable strategy (Yahia 2011).
REFERENCES
Allong, R., L.D. Wickham and M. Mohammed. 2000. The Effect of Cultivar, Fruit Ripeness, 
Storage Temperature and Duration on Quality Of fresh-Cut. Acta Horticulturae, 
509:487–94.
Berardini, N., M. Knodler, A. Schieber and R. Carle. 2005. Utilization of Mango Peels as a 
Source of Pectin and Poly Phenols. J. FoodSci. Emerg. Techol 6:442–52.
Brecht, J.K. 2010. Mango Postharvest Best Management Practices Manual. Florida: 
University of Florida IFAS Extension.
Duran Lima, L., and A. Lo Turco. 2010.  El Comercio Intraregional en America Latina: Patron 
de Especialzation y Potencial Exportador.  Los Impactos de la Crisis Internacional en 
America Latina: Hay Margen para el Decempeno de Political Regionales. 91–142. 
Series Red Mercosur.  
Fonseca, J., and N. Vergara. 2014. Logistics Systems Needs to Scale up Reduction of Produce 
Losses in the Latin America and Caribbean Region. Paper presented at the Third 
Conference on Postharvest and Quality Management of Interest in Tropical Region, 
Port of Spain, Trinidad. Acta Horticulturae 1047:173–181.
Kader, A. 2002. Fruits in the Global Market. In Fruit quality and its Biological Basis, ed. 
Michael Knee, 320. UK: Sheffield Academic Press.
Limbanyen, A., J.K. Brecht, S.A. Sargent and J.A. Bartz. 1998. Fresh-cut Mango Fruit Slices, 
HortScience 33:457. 
Luning, P.A., and J.M. Marcelis. 2007. A Conceptual Model of Food Quality Management 
Functions Based on a Techno Managerial Approach. Trends in Food Science and 
Technology 18:159–166. 
| 261
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Lundqvist, J., C. De Fraiture and D. Molden. 2008. Saving Water: From Field to Fork-Cabin 
Losses and Wastage in the Food Chain. SIWI Policy Brief. Stockholm, Sweden: SIWI.
Mazini, R., and R. Accorsi. 2013. The New Conceptual Framework for Food Supply Chain 
Assessment. Journal of Food Engineering 115:251–63.
McCollum, T., S. D’Aquino and R. McDonald. 1993. Heat Treatment Inhibits Mango Chilling 
Injury. HortSci. 28:197–98. 
Medlicott, A., M. Bhogol and S. Reynolds. 1986. Changes in Peel Pigmentation during 
Ripening of Mango Fruit (Magnifera indica, var. Tommy Atkin). Annals Appl. Biol. 
109:651–56. 
Mohammed, M., and J.K. Brecht. 2002.  Reduction of Chilling Injury in Tommy Atkins 
Mangoes during Ripening. Scientia Horticulturae 45:297–308.
Pullman, M., and W. Zhaohui. 2012. Food Supply Chain Management: Economic, Social and 
             Environmental Perspectives. New York: Routledge.
Raymundo, L.C., M.T. Ombico and T.M. de Villa. 2009. Fruit Processing. In The Mango: 
Botany, Production and Uses. 2nd ed., ed. R. Litz, 628–40, Wallingford, UK: CABI.
Rodriguez, M., and M. Respetto. 2013. Analysis of the Logistics System and Management in 
the Food Supply Chain in Latin America and the Caribbean. Regional Report Covering 
Five Country Assessments. Rome: FAO (in press).
Shukla, R.P and P.L. Tandom. 1985. Bio-ecology and Management of the Mango Weevil. 
Intl. J. Trop. Agric. 3:293–303.
Thompson, J.F., P.E. Brecht, T. Hinsch and A.A. Kader. 2000. Marine Container Transport 
of Chilled Perishable Produce. University of California, Davis, Agriculture and Natural 
Resources, Publication 21595, 31. 
University of the Philippines Los Banos (UPLB). 2005. Spray-Dried Instant Juice and 
Powder From Green Mango. Annual Report of the Food Science Cluster. Laguna, The 
Philippines: College of Agriculture.
US Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2010.  Treatment Manual. Plant Protection and 
Quarantine 2010. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/manuals/ports/
downloads/treatment.pdf. Accessed March 13, 2014.  
Van der Vorst, J.G.A.J., C.A. Silva and J.H. Trienekens. 2007. Agro-Industrial Supply 
Chain Management: Concept and Applications. Rome: FAO.  
Wu, J.S.B, H. Chen and T. Fang. 1993. Mango Juice. In Fruit Juice Processing Technology, 
ed. S. Nagy, C.S. Chen, and P.E. Shaw, 620–55. Auburndale; Agrr. Science, Inc.
Yahia, E.M., ed. 2011. Mango. In Postharvest Biology and Technology of Tropical and 
Subtropical Fruits: Volume 3: Cocona to Mango, 492–550. Sawston, Cambridge: 
Woodhead Publishing Limited. 
262 |
Ecological Modernization 
of Caribbean Agrosystems: 
From Concept to Design
Audrey Fanchone, Jean-Louis Diman, Gisèle Alexandre, 
Serge Valet and Harry Ozier-Lafontaine
INTRODUCTION 
Agriculture is now facing a new challenge, as it is not only expected 
to maximize production while reducing adverse impacts on the 
environment, but also ensure various ecosystem services (ES) and to 
diminish disservices (harmful effects). The Millennium Ecosystem 
Assessment (MEA), which pointed out the importance of proper 
ecosystem functioning for human well-being, was a turning point 
in the consideration of the services provided by agriculture. As a 
result, a transformation of agricultural systems from conventional 
agricultural systems is therefore expected. Since agrosystems are 
ecosystems controlled by humans, farming practices lie at the core of 
this transition of agriculture.  Integrated systems are the main forms 
of farming systems observed all over the world, and in Latin America 
and the Caribbean (LAC), they represent a vast legacy of experiences 
in the history, tradition and culture of such countries.
Ecosystem services (ES): The multiple ways by which people benefit from 
ecosystems e.g.: 
(i) Food: Ecosystems provide the conditions for growing food. Food comes 
principally from managed agro-ecosystems but marine and freshwater 
systems or forests also provide food for human consumption. 
(ii) Raw materials: Ecosystems provide a great diversity of materials for 
construction and fuel including wood, biofuels and plant oils that are directly 
derived from wild and cultivated plant species.
(iii) Fresh water: Ecosystems play a vital role in the global hydrological cycle, 
as they regulate the flow and purification of water. Vegetation and forests 
influence the quantity of water available locally.
(iv) Medicinal resources: Ecosystems and biodiversity provide many plants 
used as traditional medicines as well as providing the raw materials for the 
pharmaceutical industry. All ecosystems are a potential source of medicinal 
resources.
C H A P T E R  NINE
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
More generally, in the Caribbean, multispecies systems whether mixed cropping 
systems, livestock farming systems or integrated ones, provide several ES.  Using 
these systems as examples, this chapter examines the major driving forces that 
condition changes in farming practices.  Agro-ecological engineering which relies on 
the ecological paradigm, is regarded as a suitable concept and approach to support 
this transformation. The chapter also proposes methods that might support the 
design of innovative agricultural systems, namely the step by step method and the 
de novo method.  These methods are supported by concrete examples coming from 
several Caribbean or other tropical environments.
 FROM THE ‘GREEN REVOLUTION’ TO THE DOUBLE GREEN 
REVOLUTION
After the Second World War, the shift from the concept of subsistence farming to the 
‘Green Revolution’ represented a change in the prevailing agricultural paradigm, whereby 
the main objective assigned to agriculture was that of ensuring food security by securing 
an adequate market supply, a reasonable standard of living, and increasing farmers’ 
incomes. During the 1980s, this production objective was largely achieved, and surpassed 
the requirements in Europe and many industrialized countries. This new standard involved 
the use of seeds of high-yielding varieties, primarily of wheat and rice, and the adoption of 
a modern package of agricultural tools and practices involving chemical fertilizers, tractors, 
pesticides, irrigation, mechanical threshers, electric and diesel pumps, among other things 
(Parayil 2003).  This system, however, led to a decrease in farm numbers (rural exodus, loss 
of rural jobs), specialization and marginalization of territories, standardization of landscape, 
and deterioration of natural resources.  The ‘Green Revolution’ also caused enormous 
environmental impacts, including soil degradation, water pollution and loss of biodiversity.
Agriculture is not only expected to produce food and fibre either for direct consumption 
or for industrial use, but also has to provide some other functions while at the same time 
minimizing adverse effects on the environment (Zhang et al. 2007).  The new challenges 
faced by agriculture are to ensure various ES, to resolve apparent conflicts between them, 
and to diminish its disservices (Doré et al. 2011). The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 
provided a new conceptual framework for analysing these multiple ES (MEA 2005).  In 
new agrosystems, ES are not externalities, but are intentionally produced by stakeholders, 
who create such services by implementing practices (minimum tillage, crop association, 
organic fertilisation, integrated control of pests) which modify the production sequence. 
A new issue for researchers is therefore the evaluation of the cost of the production of 
such ES.  In the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for 
264 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
Development report (IAASTD 2008) it has been argued that the challenge to achieving this 
multi-objective agriculture not only requires continuing the development of disciplinary 
knowledge, but also more systemic approaches, and has recently officially called for a 
reorientation of agricultural science and technology towards more holistic approaches. 
New concepts such as ‘agroecology’ and ‘ecological intensification’ have been developed to 
support this transformation.
Vanloqueren and Baret (2009) have defined agroecological engineering as ‘an umbrella 
concept for different agricultural practices and innovations such as biological control, cultivar 
mixtures, agroforestry systems, habitat management techniques (e.g. strip management 
or beetle banks around wheat fields), or natural systems agriculture, aiming at perennial 
food-grain-producing systems. Crop rotations, soil fertility improvement practices, mixed 
crop and livestock management and intercropping are also included. Some applications 
involve cutting edge technologies while others are old practices (e.g. traditional systems that 
provide significant insights to agroecology).  For these authors, ‘the scientific paradigm on 
which agroecological engineering relies is ecology (and holism)’.  As such, the objective is 
the design of productive agricultural systems that require as few agrochemicals and energy 
inputs as possible, and instead rely on ecological interactions and synergisms between 
biological components to produce the mechanisms that will enable the systems to boost 
their own soil fertility, productivity and crop protection (Altieri 1995).  
Some aspects of agroecological engineering may be related to biomimicry (Benyus 1997), 
as illustrated in Figure 9.1. Doré et al., (2011) noted that in natural ecosystems, as a result 
of the various animal and plant species, the final ecosystem is provided with a number of 
services, for instance pollination. In standard cropping systems, these interactions may 
lead to pest damage on crops, and so must be managed utilizing various control methods 
to limit yield loss.  An increase in plant species diversity in systems mimicking natural 
ecosystems could allow natural enemies to control pests and generate ES (Doré et al. 2011). 
The concept of agroecological engineering, which sets out to improve the structure of the 
agricultural system and ‘to make every part of the structure work well’ (Liang 1998), differs 
from genetic engineering for example, which has as its primary objective the improvement 
of only a single element of the agroecosystem, for example (modifying existing plants or 
designing new plants).  
Because agrosystems are ecosystems controlled by humans, farming practices are at the 
core of this transition of agriculture.  According to Meynard et al. (2006) four major driving 
forces promote the transformation of farming practices. These are: 
i. the recognition of the responsibility of agriculture in the deterioration of the 
environment; 
| 265
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
ii. the evolution of the demand for food and non-food products; 
iii. the consideration of work and incomes of the farmers; and 
iv. the evolution of the place of agriculture in the territories.  
However, this transformation of agricultural practices presents some challenges.  The 
first challenge is between the economy and the environment, because of the necessity to 
decrease inputs (e.g. fertilizers, phytosanitary products) and the absence of compensation 
for production losses or additional workload, with the second being between the individual 
logic of the farmers and that of the collective governance.  This latter challenge is related to 
supply chains in the same territory, which compete directly or indirectly for the same raw 
materials such as fertile soils, flat lands, irrigated water and local breeds (Le Bail 2000).
Figure 9.1: A comparison of natural ecosystems, conventional cropping 
systems and agroecosystems inspired from natural ecosystems, with 
emphasis on crop protection. 
Source: Doré et al. (2011)
266 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
Enhancing and integrating ES in Caribbean agricultural 
systems
In some parts of the world, integrated systems (IS) are the predominant forms of farming 
systems (Herrero et al. 2010).  Nowadays, IS produce close to 50 percent of the world’s 
cereals and most of the staples consumed by poor people: 41 percent of maize, 86 percent 
of rice, 66 percent of sorghum, and 74 percent of millet production (Herrero et al. 2009). 
They also generate the bulk of livestock products in the developing world: 75 percent of the 
milk and 60 percent of the meat, and employ many millions of people on farms, in formal 
and informal markets, in processing plants, and other parts of the value chain.  Although 
there is a lack of available information in LAC, IS have an informal background of rich 
experiences in the history and tradition of these countries (González-García et al. 2012).  In 
these countries, IS have persisted over time because as natural ecosystems, they appear to 
be well adapted to local constraints, after a long process of natural selection (Dawson and 
Fry 1998; Ewel 1999).  This is even more the case for most of the small and large islands of 
the Caribbean where there are added constraints such as: the shortage of arable land and 
the high competition between agriculture and other uses such as urbanization and tourism. 
In these countries, the urgent need to increase outputs of each piece of agricultural land 
by producing food, feed, and other ES, tests the boundaries of conventional agriculture. 
The challenge in the Caribbean zone therefore becomes to promote IS which enable the 
provision of ES.
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES PROVIDED BY CARIBBEAN SYSTEMS
 Multi-functionality and ecosystem services
Agriculture fulfils three main functions, namely:
1. production (including economics aspects) – of food and non-food goods, and the 
provision of raw material for industry; 
2. socio-cultural – to maintain the social fabric of rural areas, planning in territories 
and transmitting of a cultural heritage; and 
3. environmental – biodiversity preservation, regulation of the environment, 
conservation and regulation of water quality, and to decrease energy consumption. 
Despite an awareness of the multifunctional character of agriculture, this concept 
has not been embraced within the public policy context. According to MEA (2005), the 
acknowledgement of the importance of ecosystem functioning for human well-being, 
provided a turning point in the consideration of the services provided by agriculture. 
| 267
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
The concept of ES not only encompasses the same functions as those expressed by multi-
functionality, but also embodies the maintenance of the good functioning of the ecosystem. 
ES emphasize the human usage of natural processes through the supply of material goods, 
determine ecological regulation modes, and the role of the ecosystem to support both 
productive and non-productive activities.
Figure 9.2: The multi-scale framework of the Millennium Ecosystem 
Assessment 
Source: MEA (2005)
268 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
The MEA (2005): a conceptual framework to study ES 
The MEA defined four categories of ES; supporting, provisioning, regulating and cultural 
(Figure 9.2). The supporting services relate to services that are necessary for the production 
of all other ES. They differ from provisioning, regulating, and cultural services in that their 
impacts on people are often indirect or occur over a very long time, whereas changes in 
the other categories have relatively direct and short-term impacts on people.  While the 
provisioning services relate to the products obtained from the ecosystem, the regulating 
services are the benefits obtained from the regulation of ecosystem processes.  Finally, 
the cultural services relate to the non-material benefits people obtain from ecosystems 
through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation, and aesthetic 
experiences.  
As the figure shows, many of the services listed within the MEA framework are highly 
interlinked and involve different aspects of the same biological processes. Moreover, MEA 
services only relate to the positive impacts of ecosystems on human well-being.  The basic 
concept adopted by the MEA, is based on a multi-scale and multi-disciplinary approach 
that provides an integrated perspective by emphasizing the interdependence between socio-
economic and environmental issues. 
Figure 9.3: Classification of ecosystem services from the Millennium 
Ecosystem Assessment 
Supporting sevices:
-Soil structure and fertility
-Nutrient cycling Provisioning sevices:
-Water provision -Food, fiber and fuel 
-Genetic biodiversity To                   From   production
Regulating sevices:
-Soil retention Non-marketed sevices:
-Pollination -Water supply
-Dung burial Agricultural -Soil conservation
-Natural control of plant pests -Climate change mitigation
-Food sources & habitat ecosystems -Aesthetic landscapes
  for beneficial insects -Wildlife habitat
-Water purification
-Atmospheric regulation
Ecosystems dis-services: Ecosystem dis-sevices:
-Pest damage -Habitat loss
-Competition for water from -Nutrient runoff
  other ecosystems -Pesticide poisoning of
-Competition for pollination   non-target species
Feedback effect of dis-services from agriculture to agricultural input
(e.g., removal of natural enemy habitat can encourage pest outbreaks)
Source: Zhang et al. (2007) | 269
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
ES in agrosystems
The sustainability of agrosystems presupposes the preservation of their economic and 
ecological viability, i.e. the preservation of their productive capacity, as it relates to the 
maintenance of the good ecological functioning of the soils and the economical production 
of this system (market and societal value).  Zhang et al. (2007) presented a conceptual 
framework for agrosystems and introduced the concept of disservices (Figure 9.3).
 ES provided by multispecies systems
The following sections provide an overview of some of the ES provided by multispecies 
systems in tropical areas. 
Mixed crop systems
In considering the provisioning of services, productivity per unit area can be increased 
when crops are combined, compared to single crops systems (Willey 1979; Jolliffe 1997), 
provided that the combination is suitable.  Yield advantage occurs because growth resources 
such as light, water, and nutrients are more completely absorbed and converted to crop 
biomass by the intercrop over time and space. This is as a result of differences in the 
competitive ability for growth resources between the component crops, in characteristics 
such as rates of canopy development, final canopy size (width and height), photosynthetic 
adaptation of canopies to irradiance conditions, and rooting depth (Midmore 1993; Morris 
and Garrity 1993; Tsubo, Walker and Mukhala 2001).  Biotic factors such as the presence of 
mycorrhizae, bacteria, fungi, termites and insects also play equally important roles (Derelle 
2012).  When tubers are used in combination with legumes/maize, the land equivalent ratios 
(LER) of the sweet potato and bean combination, ranges from 1.69 to 1.79, depending on 
density of beans.  For a yam and maize/peanut combination, the LER ranges from 0.98 to 
1.60, and was found to result in favourable yields/unit area, as well as yam tuber size (Cornet, 
2005; Lyonga 1980; Odurukwe 1986).  A tomato and cowpea combination produces a LER 
of 1.08 to 1.31 depending on their respective densities (Obedoni et al. 2005).
Soil protection/conservation services are also part of the regulating services.  Cropping 
combinations and the hedges or trees associated with them, due to the high crop density, play 
a significant role in reducing soil and water erosion, thus contributing to the conservation 
or resilience of soils.  An example of this can be found in West-Cameroon, where, as 
compared with mixed cropping systems, intensive monoculture was found to offer less 
soil protection against the ‘splash’ effect of raindrops that have high kinetic energy (Valet 
1999). For andosols cultivated with maize monocrops on a 25 percent slope, such erosion 
can reach 122 T/ha/year (1996). 
270 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
Pest and disease control represents yet another regulating service provided by multispecies 
systems.  Five hypotheses are generally advanced to explain the ability of crop combinations 
to regulate plant pests:
1. The disruption hypothesis (push): one of the associated species disrupts the ability 
of the pathogen to attack the host plant by confusing it through the emission of 
volatile substances, visual effects, and a barrier effect (Khan et al. 1998).
2. The hypothesis of the trap plant (pull): one of the associated species attracts 
pathogens, keeping them out of reach of the more vulnerable crop and also attracts 
predators to the pests.
3. The natural enemies’ hypothesis: based on the ability of mixed systems to favour 
greater diversity of predators and parasites.
4. The hypothesis of micro-environment modification: mixed cropping systems 
can either create more favourable conditions for the plant under attack, or less 
favourable conditions for the development of the parasite, or more favourable 
conditions for the development of its natural enemies. 
5. Vertical and horizontal barrier effect – enabling plants to be concealed from insects, 
diluting the vector, modifying temperatures and the exposure that favours insects 
climbing up a stem.
One of the major roles of crop combinations is their ability to resist attack by multiple 
pests and diseases.  An analysis performed by Risch (1983) on an assessment of pests 
and natural enemies in polyculture as against monoculture, showed that in 53 percent  of 
cases, in the former, less serious attacks occurred than in the latter.  More importantly, 
the percentage of natural enemies of mixed crops is greater than in monocultures (59 
percent  vs. 9 percent ), yet in only 32 percent  of the studies it was shown that there was 
no difference between monocultures and mixed cropping systems.  The beneficial effect of 
mixed cropping in controlling disease and parasites was confirmed by other researchers (see 
for example Rämert, Lennartsson and Davies 2002; Root 1973; Szumigalski and Rene,2005; 
Vandermeer 1989).  The beneficial effect is however not easy to demonstrate, as it is complex 
and unpredictable (Trenbath 1999).  A cropping system with plant species used for different 
purposes can therefore assist in effectively addressing the issue of insect pests.
Livestock farming systems
Particularly under tropical conditions, a major challenge associated with livestock farming 
systems (LFS) has been a lack of recognition of the importance and benefits to be derived 
from the non-productive functions of animals, as well as the husbandry activities for the 
| 271
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
farmer/household and society (Lhoste et al. 1993). The LFS is not only concerned with the 
production of high-quality commodities, to meet the objective of food security, but also 
with the provision of multiple ecoservices as prescribed by MEA (2005). Animals and LFS 
are considered as highly multifunctional in tropical agroecosystems (Dedieu et al. 2011). 
With respect to the framework provided by Zhang et al. (2007), in the Caribbean, the first 
ES of LFS remains the provision of services (i.e. production of food, fibre, fuel).  LFS also 
fulfil other categories of ES including: supporting services (soil structure and fertility, 
nutrient cycling, and genetic biodiversity), regulating services (soil retention, dung burial, 
atmospheric regulation), and non-marketable services (soil conservation, climate change 
mitigation, and wildlife habitat). 
In most farming systems in the world, LFS are practiced in association with crops (Herrero 
et al. 2010).  In such integrated systems, crop and livestock activities compete for the same 
scarce resources which include land, labour, capital and skills. Consequently, in general, 
the productivity of livestock in mixed systems (e.g. milk production/animal/day, growth 
and reproduction rates), is lower than in specialised systems, so that the provisioning ES 
can be considered somewhat reduced, leading to the conclusion that IS are less productive. 
However, while there may be lower productivity per unit land or animal in one enterprise, 
higher overall productivity is common.  This has been demonstrated for example in the case 
of integrated dairy systems in Cuba that have been assessed to be as productive as intensive 
single systems and totally more sustainable (Funes-Monzote and Monzote 2001).  From 
the IS perspective, livestock plays many vital roles in the households and economies of the 
developing world, including producing food and power, generating income, storing capital 
reserves, and enhancing social status (Alexandre et al. 2014).  In addition, livestock can 
be used for weed control, production of manure for fertilizer (Boval, Bellon and Alexandre 
2014) and also for fuel (Preston and Rodriguez 2014).
 Crop–livestock integration is generally driven by increased population pressure, the main 
feature characterizing the Caribbean islands, which is often the main reason for farmers 
to intensify their farming systems.  Livestock can affect the cycling of nutrients, opening 
alternative pathways, such as importation of nutrients from common land, and affect the 
speed and efficiency with which nutrients can be converted to plant-useable forms (Delve 
et al. 2001).  Inclusion of livestock in mixed farming systems can provide an alternative 
use for crop residues.  For example, if farmers need to plant a crop soon after harvesting 
a previous one, stubble incorporation may not be feasible, so that farmers may resort to 
burning it, resulting in increased carbon dioxide emissions.  In contrast, livestock in IS 
can be used to remove and process stubble, potentially reducing the losses of carbon and 
nutrients.  Blending crops and livestock has the potential to maintain ecosystem function 
and health and help prevent agricultural systems from becoming too ‘brittle’, by promoting 
272 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
greater biodiversity and an increased capacity to absorb shocks to the natural resource base, 
something which Holling (2001) defined as resilience.
From an ecological viewpoint, grasslands are ecosystems which exhibit a strong link 
between herbivores and floral diversity (Gliessman 2009) and when well-managed, can be 
a tool for ecological and regulating services, notably to maintain and restore biodiversity of 
the open landscape (Ma and Swinton 2011).  Moreover, grasslands can potentially offset a 
significant proportion of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.  Appropriate management 
strategies, in the areas of stocking rate, grazing pressure and application of nitrogen 
fertilization would however be key (Boval et al. 2014).  Animals contribute to improving 
the quality of the ground cover, important for soil erosion prevention and the watershed 
processes of infiltration and water retention (Gliessman et al. 2009). Thus, pastoral 
nomadism, a complex set of practices and knowledge, ensures the long-term maintenance 
of a sophisticated ‘triangle of sustainability’, which includes plants, animals and people.
Beyond the ecological services, natural resources and landscapes may provide numerous 
social, cultural, recreational, and aesthetic services which satisfy human need and well-being 
(Ma and Swinton 2011; Boval and Dixon 2012).  As such, most traditional agroecosystems 
have remarkable characteristics which are regulated by strong cultural values and 
collective forms of social organization, including customary institutions for agro-ecological 
management, normative arrangements for resource access and benefit sharing, value 
systems and rituals (Altieri and Toledo 2011).  Livestock production systems based on 
grasslands therefore have great potential for social equity, poverty alleviation, risk reduction 
and gender equality (Gliessman 2009). These services must be seriously considered as 
they are well supported by agro-ecological concepts. The development of local food chains, 
in addition to renewing the meaning of farm work and the social links between city and 
country, also has an impact on energy consumption (Mundler and Rumpus 2012).  These 
are important in the context of the exploitation of grassland eco-economic factors and are 
properly taken into account in the agro-ecological concepts. 
Examples of integrated systems in the Caribbean
From Creole garden to simplified multispecies systems
Multispecies cropping systems cover many modes of spatial distribution: on the surface, 
above and below the ground level, and time distribution, in relay with perennial or annual 
species (Valet and Ozier-Lafontaine 2014).  The archetype of multispecies cropping systems 
in the Caribbean is the Creole garden that combines very different plants (e.g. grasses, 
shrubs and trees) in varying combinations, and in contrasting environments (i.e. lowlands 
and highlands).  These systems are very close to agroforestry systems which incorporate 
trees and shrubs (Figure 9.4). 
| 273
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
 The principles of the Creole garden are very similar to those of agroforestry systems, 
as they involve the growing of annual or biennial agricultural crops along with forest 
species.  The long-term effects of this system on soil fertility will however depend on the 
management practices adopted at establishment, as well as at subsequent re-establishment. 
Complementary, supplementary and competitive interactions exist between trees and 
crops, and higher crop yields have been obtained when some agricultural crops are inter-
planted near leguminous trees such as Faidherbia albida (Acacia) (FAO 1994).  Allelopathic 
interactions between trees and agricultural crops have also been investigated and such 
interactions have been reported (Susesh and Vinaya 1987).  Many variations of this system 
are found in small family farms, involving between two and three species in the plots (Figure 
9.5), which are not only chosen for human or animal consumption, but also for ES, namely 
in the form of the supply of nitrogen by legumes, and quick ground cover of creeping species 
for weed control.
According to Valet and Ozier-Lafontaine (2014), while the idea that ‘intercropping 
was only for peasant farming and has no place in modern agriculture’, has persisted for a 
long time among researchers and developers, it appears that in many areas of the world, 
traditional farmers developed or inherited complex farming systems in the form of poly-
cultures that were well adapted to the local conditions.  It has been further suggested (Valet 
and Ozier-Lafontaine 2014) that this has helped farmers to sustainably manage harsh 
environments and to meet their subsistence needs, without depending on mechanization, 
chemical fertilizers, pesticides or other technologies of modern agricultural science. These 
practices, which are generally more efficient than the high-intensity agricultural systems, 
highlight the ‘agroecological engineering’ developed over centuries by many peasants in 
tropical zones. 
The Tosoly farm of Colombia
Preston (2009) has noted that farming systems should aim at maximizing plant biomass 
production from locally available diversified resources, processing of the biomass on the 
farm to provide food, feed and energy, and recycling of all waste materials.  In addition, the 
generation of electricity can be a by-product of food/feed production instead of developing 
biofuels, which threaten food security (Suárez and Martín 2012).  Biomass is fractioned into 
inedible cell wall materials that can be converted, through gasification into a source of fuel 
for the internal combustion engines driving electrical generators.  The cell contents and 
related structures are used as human food or animal feed.  It also offers opportunities for 
sequestration of carbon in the form of biochar, the solid residue remaining after gasification 
of the biomass, which in turn is used to enhance soil fertility and crop productivity.  
274 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
On the Tosoly farm, located in a humid, tropical region of Colombia, the integrated food-
feed-fuel model has been implemented by Preston and Rodriguez (2013).  The farm is a 
medium-sized unit (7 ha), and in order to promote biodiversity, the crops (sugar cane, fruit 
and forage trees, and some forage plants) on the farm, are replicated in different areas. 
The livestock and fuel components are chosen for their capacity to utilize the crops and by-
products produced on the farm.  All crops must be at least dual-purpose, have good biomass 
productivity, as it relates to the efficient capture of solar energy (new energy revolution), 
and adequate chemical composition (in mixed diets). 
The inclusion of livestock in the farming system is seen as a means of optimising the use 
of highly productive perennial crops such as sugar cane and multi-purpose trees. Sugar 
cane is easily separated into energy-rich juice, which can replace cereal grains in the feeding 
of pigs, as is done in Trinidad and Tobago, and Guadeloupe (Archimède et al. 2013), and 
residual bagasse, which can be used as one of the feedstocks for the gasifier. Forage trees 
are the natural feed resources for goats, which selectively consume the leaves, leaving the 
fibrous stems as another feedstock for gasification. Other farmyard animals are combined to 
maximize the use of feedstuffs, providing manure or draught power, and livestock products 
such as eggs, rabbit meat and honey.  Any surplus commodities which remain after the 
family needs have been satisfied, are sold in the village market.  Waste water from coffee 
pulping, family washing, and also all high moisture wastes from pigs and other animals 
are recycled through polyethylene biodigesters.  Effluent from all biodigesters is combined 
and recycled to fertilise crops. 
Fruit tree-crop-chicken farm of Martinique 
Due to the wet climatic conditions found in Martinique throughout the year, fast weed 
growth is fast, resulting in the need for the implementation of permanent control measures 
in fruit tree crop systems, as this has a strong negative impact on yields. Weed control 
however generates high maintenance costs to fruit producers.  Chemical weed control is the 
most common method used, but this is not a sustainable method due to issues related to 
water pollution and soil erosion (Hipps and Samuelson 1991; Duran-Zuazo and Rodriguez-
Pleguezuelo 2008). Grazing animals which do not harm the cash crops therefore constitute 
a viable alternative. In Martinique for example, poultry (chickens and geese) were used 
in an orchard of guava trees and the feasibility and effectiveness of weed control were 
evaluated (Lavigne, Dumbardon-Martial and Lavigne 2012).  It was found that although 
geese can be used to effectively control the herbaceous biomass, weed selection by the birds 
leads to a significant modification of the flora. The use of grass and perennial legumes in 
the orchard can also serve to enhance this cultivation system.  The long-term effect of such 
| 275
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
an association however, remains to be assessed. Management of the stocking rate also 
plays a crucial role in such systems. In high stocking rate systems, over grazing can lead 
to deforestation and loss of associated biodiversity. This example shows how management 
practices can encompass both the provision of ecological services (weed management) and 
ecological disservices (loss of biodiversity).       
The neo-tropical animal wildlife programme in Trinidad and Tobago 
Added to the previous ES of production and regulation functions, this section underlines 
some other environmental and socio-economic services provided by livestock via the 
utilisation of an original case study.  Tropical LFS have exhibited rich and high diversity not 
only for domesticated animals, but also for wildlife (species best adapted to their natural 
habitat).  One is presented through the neo-tropical animal wildlife program implemented 
in the Caribbean (Garcia 2005).  Around 30 important neo-tropical animal wildlife species 
are found in LAC.  Twelve of these species are native to Trinidad and Tobago, where they are 
sold at higher prices than domestic animals.  The neo-tropical animal wildlife programme 
fosters the high biodiversity of wildlife, building a whole concept to sustain a viable economic 
activity on the basis of AE principles developed at the food system level.  According to Garcia 
(2005), the value of neo-tropical animal wildlife is varied, and can be broken down into an 
ecological role, economic importance, a nutritional function and socio-cultural significance. 
All of these features have a real impact on farmers’ or hunters’ income, gastronomy and 
agro-tourism in the country, something that is very difficult to assess. 
The agroecological transition process in a family farm, San Juan, 
Cuba 
The San Juan farm is one of the more than 100,000 farms distributed by the Cuban 
government in the recent years.  It is located in Junco village in the Cienfuegos valley and 
is currently owned by the Rey-Novoa family, which has extensive experience in traditional 
agriculture. Funes-Monzote (2009) studied the agroecological transition process of this 
agroecosystem over a period of eight years (2004–2011), taking into account criteria 
of social equity, economic rationality and ecological sustainability.  It is a traditional 
peasant farm, in which agroecological transition started in 2004, from land which was 
managed in a conventional agriculture mode and then abandoned for nearly a decade.  A 
detailed characterization was performed which considered the attributes of sustainable 
agroecosystems in an annual cyclical process of assessment, design, management and 
evaluation, according to the methodologies proposed by Masera et al. (1999); Funes-Monzote 
(2009).  The family was involved in the identification, selection and implementation of the 
indicators of sustainability.  
276 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
The key lessons derived from the Rey-Novoa family experience with an innovative process 
of agroecological transition were (Rey-Novoa and Funes-Monzote 2013):
1. greater food self-sufficiency and traditional production;
2. promotion of local, drought-tolerant pasture in rotation or silvopastoral systems;
3. increased nutrient recycling, water, soil and forest conservation, and the biodiversity 
associated with native crops and animals;
4. account of natural conditions (male effect) in bovine reproduction;
5. genetic and species diversification on the farm via the integration of trees with 
crops and animals;
6. minimal dependence on external inputs for the basic infrastructure of housing, 
transportation, production, supply sources and reservoirs, irrigation of low power 
energy and water consumption.
The experience of the Rey-Novoa family farm shows that efforts to promote agriculture 
and knowledge processes in harmony with nature and society, must consist not only of 
actions to preserve and strengthen the productive logic of peasant families, but also a broad 
process of empowerment, capacity building and agricultural innovation at the local level, 
based on the participation of families with help from researchers, local institutions and 
rural organizations to redesign the agricultural land (Funes-Monzote 2013).
An agroecological transition model adopted in the context of the family farm is something 
that can be replicated within the framework of other agricultural systems found within 
the Caribbean in the quest for sustainability.  As has shown, the process of agroecological 
transition helps to mitigate the degradation that exists in several agroecosystems.  It is 
therefore critical that such studies should be continued.  This will allow for the development 
of an agricultural model that is less dependent on oil, has a low environmental impact, is 
better suited to climate change, and can be characterised as a local and multifunctional 
agriculture.
Available tools and practical recommendations
In light of the foregoing, a number of tools are available for use, in addition to which, a 
number of practical recommendations can be made, which can be adopted to help in the 
management of these ecosystems.
 Selection of cover crops for ES
At the National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA) in Guadeloupe, an expert 
system, SIMSERV was developed to assist with the selection of cover crops (Ozier-Lafontaine 
| 277
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
et al. 2011).1  This tool was created to optimise the selection of potential species to one or 
more services, while shortening the time of selection. This approach offers the advantage 
of capturing expert knowledge in an easily accessible and reusable database. For each 
cover crop, SIMSERV calculates the potential for it to provide a service in a given context, 
which is defined by the user who provides required information related to the: i) required 
service, ii) description of agroecological and socio-economic characteristics,  iii) mode of 
establishment - in rotation or association, and iv) a cash crop.
The system matches the data defined for the particular context, with information from 
the database, which is then used to calculate the capacity for each cover crop to provide 
the service or not.  The method of calculating is based on the aggregation of decisions in 
a “decision tree”.  Three profiles are given in the application: i) the administrator builds 
the decision tree; ii) the expert assigns values to the indicators to describe the cash crops 
and the cover crops; and iii) the user uses this information to describe his/her scenario, 
then chooses a context.  Based on the analysis for each cover crop, the results, which are 
presented in tabular form, provide the user with an indication of the name and the qualitative 
assessment obtained for the selected service.  Cover crops – ‘very good’, based on their 
capacity to provide the service, in response to the selected context. 
Soil organic matter conservation
The soil organic matter (OM) is one of the essential components of agrosystems. Among 
its agro-environmental functions, OM helps maintain the structure and porosity of the soil 
(effect on water storage, its ventilation and the risk of erosion), stimulate biological activity, 
preserve biodiversity of the soil, provide nutrients to the crops (nitrogen, phosphorus, 
sulphur) and also helps to retain some micro pollutants (i.e. an effect on water quality). 
Changes in the OM content due to improper land use and farming practices, greatly 
affect all soil functions; the physical, chemical and biological quality.  To address this, the 
MorGwanik© tool was developed.2  It is based on the results obtained at the INRA French 
Antilles and Guiana Research Centre, with respect to the functioning of tropical soils, the 
fate of crop residues and the organic inputs (compost and agricultural reusable waste).  It 
also takes into account the effect of the great diversity of soils and microclimates present 
in Guadeloupe on the OM content.  MorGwanik© was designed to estimate the evolution of 
the OM content in agricultural soils of Guadeloupe according to some user-defined choices, 
1. For further details on SIMSERV see: http://toolsforagroecology.antilles.inra.fr/simserv.
2. Further details on this tool can be found at: http://toolsforagroecology.antilles.inra.fr/morgwanik/index.
php/morgwanik/.
278 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
such as location of the farm, useful crop rotation, type and rate of organic fertilizers used.  It 
is intended for agricultural stakeholders such as farmers, technical advisors, policy makers, 
researchers, agronomists, and environmental professionals, and can also be easily adapted 
to systems found in the other Caribbean islands.
Animal feeding strategies
Both the quantity and quality of feeds are deciding factors not only for animal survival 
but more importantly to meet their nutrient needs for maintenance and production. 
Feeding and nutrition-related factors also impact upon, and often determine individual 
vulnerability to climatic constraints or potential diseases. Feeding practices should ideally 
match the available local resources as previously stated (Preston 2009).  Many authors 
have recommended exploiting available feed and by-products instead of building a feeding 
system according to animal requirements (refer to the examples of sugar cane and cocoyam 
outlined in the section on the Tosoly farm).  It is not a question of maximising the biological 
function of production, but rather optimising the feed resource partitioning at both the 
farm and territory levels, in the absence of competition between users.
The following section provides some recommendations in the area of feeding animals 
based on data gathered from Caribbean and Latin American experiences in the area of 
domestic animal (Table 9.1) and wildlife production (Table 9.2) suited for the region. 
Brown-Uddenberg et al. (2004) for example, reported that the agouti (Dasyprocta 
leporina) can eat any kind of vegetable matter, and in Trinidad, these animals, both 
in the wild and captivity, were reported to eat a wide variety of fruits from trees and 
shrubs (40 species), herbs and grasses (four species), garden crops (17 species) and 
livestock feeds.  The peccary (Tayassu tajacu), a pig-like mammal, is known to be 
herbivorous and frugivorous in Brazil and Trinidad (Young et al. 2012) and is regarded 
as a pseudo-ruminant, thus indicating a potential for non-conventional farming. 
| 279
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Table 9.1: Foliage and non-conventional feeds offered to goats and pigs as 
examples of the high biodiversity of Latin America
Feed Goat/sheep Pig Reference
Sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas) 
• foliage x X 2] and 4] 
• tuber X 2] and 4]
Cassava (Manihot esculenta)
• foliage x X 2] and 4] 
• tuber** x 4]
Water spinach (Ipomoea aquatica) 
• foliage X 2] 
Mulberry (Morus alba) 
• foliage x X 1], 2] and 3] 
Cocoyam (Xanthosoma saggitifolium)
• foliage X 2] and 4]
Gliricidia (Gliricidia sepium) 
• foliage x 1], 3] and 4
Erythrina (Erythrina glauca)
• foliage x X 3] 
Banana (Musa paradisiaca)
• foliage x 3] 
• stem x 3] and 4]
• fruit*** x x 4]
Sugar cane (Sacharum officinalis)
• foliage x 4]
• stick x X 4]
• juice X 4]
• bagasse x 3]
**after detoxification; ***goat - green; pig - green and ripe; x – study undertaken 
Source: Iglesias et al. (2006)1; Rodriguez (2010)2; Alexandre et al. (2012)3 and Archimède et al. (2014)4
280 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
Table 9.2: Resources consumed by wild mammals in Trinidad and Tobago 
Feed Agouti Peccary Reference*
Sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas) 
• foliage x X 1] and 2] 
• tuber X 2] 
Cassava (Manihot esculenta)
• foliage x X 1] and 4]
• tuber** x 2] and 4]
Pumpkin 
• fruit x X 1], 2] and 4]
Water grass (Commelina elegans) 
• foliage x 3] 
Trichantera gigantea
• foliage X 4]
Leucaena leucocephala
• foliage x X 3] 
Banana (Musa paradisiaca)
• fruit** x X 4]
Sugar cane (Sacharum officinalis)
• foliage x 1]
** Agouti – ripe fruit; Peccary – green 
Source: Garcia et al., (2006)1; Nogueira-Fihlo (2010)2; Garcia et al. (2012)3 and Young et al. (2012)4 
THE CHALLENGE OF REDESIGNING FARMING SYSTEMS
Meynard et al. (2006) listed four major driving forces behind changes in farming practices. 
These are: the deterioration of the environment and the recognized responsibility of 
agriculture; the evolution of the demand of food and non-food products; the consideration 
of work and incomes of farmers in a globalized world; and the evolution of the place of 
agriculture in the territories.  Because of these forces, some radical changes to cropping and 
livestock farming systems are emerging.  The improvement of agricultural systems clearly 
calls for innovative measures to facilitate an improvement of the ES, the adaptation to 
climate change, the integration of territorial dynamics, and the design of agri-food systems. 
| 281
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
The classic challenge remains between economic and environmental requirements. The 
other challenges are between the individual farmer’s decisions and territorial dynamic, 
and between sectors of a same territory, associated with competition among different 
productions for territorial resources.  
Resolving these challenges and reconciling contradictory demands require either the 
working out of new compromises, or the proposal of new solutions to resolve them, as 
against focussing on the somewhat unattainable desirable innovations or ideal farming 
systems.  A systematic approach to innovation is required, which involves: identifying a 
range of solutions; leaving the decision-making to farmers and other stakeholders; helping 
them to build their own systems adapted to their specific realities; and in the process, 
compromising where necessary. 
The pathways to innovative design
These encompass a consideration of the objectives and constraints of each actor in 
the innovative process, both at the farm level and at the country level. At farm level, in 
order to support farmers in the design of systems adapted to their situation, two major 
approaches can be distinguished: the ‘de novo’ design and the step-by-step design (Meynard 
et al. 2012).  The ‘de novo’ design aims to design cropping or farming systems that break 
away from existing systems (very often model-based design), whereas, the step-by-step 
design incorporates the transition towards innovative systems by improving the existing 
systems step by step, in a progressive manner. This latter system is primarily based on a 
spiral of continuous improvement including diagnosis/development of possible systems/ 
implementation/and new diagnosis.
At the country level, interactions of stakeholders around resource management need to 
be supported.  Innovations relating to the co-ordination of farming systems at the country 
level can assist by taking into account the different interests of the various stakeholders 
which can be contradictory and often irreconcilable. Identification of action items for 
public authorities is at the core of the designing process since these constitute the means to 
facilitate the transition process.  Public actions have to be taken carefully because: i) they 
sometimes strongly limit the capacity of farmers to adapt to the diversity of soils, climates 
and situations; ii) they are codified at the elementary agricultural technique level whereas 
environmental impacts often depend on interactions between several techniques; and iii) 
they are often felt to be constraints.  Within this context, institutional innovation is required 
that will favour agronomic or agro-ecological innovation.
Scientists are then faced with a paradoxes since innovative design cannot be programmed 
(by definition) and yet it is essential if it is to fully feature in the programmes of 
282 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
research institutions/organisations and contribute to the shaping of scientific priorities, 
interdisciplinarity and partnership.  The following section elaborates how this pathway 
was used to design systems adapted to the Caribbean region.  Two examples are provided: 
the step-by-step design of citrus systems (Le Bellec et al. 2012) and the de novo design of 
banana farming systems (Blazy et al. 2010 and Archimède et al. 2012).  
Examples of two design systems in the Caribbean
Step-by-step design of citrus systems
This design methodology has been used for citrus farmers in Guadeloupe as a mechanism 
to reduce herbicide load.  Where changes were made in the field, the expectation was that 
there would be impacts felt within the whole farming system (local), in the agricultural sector 
(regional), and the pesticide industry (global).  These represent some of the ‘cascading effects’ 
that are mostly unpredictable, but would nevertheless influence the general sustainability 
of the modified regional socio-economic and agricultural landscape (Kinzig et al. 2006). 
This demands a need for dynamic, non-linear, multi-stakeholder, and transdisciplinary 
approaches (Veldkamp et al. 2009) to sustainable development, in order to preserve the 
structure, identity, and functions of a ‘socio-ecological system’ (Walker et al. 2004).  
With a view to redesigning an alternative citrus production systems adapted to the 
Guadeloupe particular context, Le Bellec et al. (2011) developed the DISC method (DISC: 
an acronym for re-Design and assessment of Innovative Sustainable Cropping Systems), 
which involves, a multi-scale, multi-stakeholder, participatory approach, and represents 
an improvement on the classical prototyping methods developed at field level.  The DISC 
method involves four categories of stakeholders distributed into two distinct groups; 
professional stakeholders (farmers, researchers, and agricultural advisors), and public 
stakeholders (representatives of the State, regional institutions, civil organizations), and 
has been used to address citrus production in Guadeloupe (Figure 9.6), where local demand 
for citrus is covered mostly by imports. To satisfy this demand, producers had to increase 
production while reducing the use of pesticides, in accordance with French government 
objectives (Ecophyto 2008).  This ruling was introduced at a time when citrus producers 
were still facing unresolved technical difficulties and were struggling to improve the quality 
of their products on the local market.  The main concern in re-designing citrus cropping 
systems therefore was to develop lower-input cropping systems with improved economic 
and quality performances, in a move toward sustainable citrus production in Guadeloupe 
(Le Bellec et al. 2012). 
| 283
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Figure 9.6: DISC method application on the Guadeloupian citrus production
Note: 1) public stakeholders convey global orientations for local agricultural development through an agronomical 
diagnosis, and a participatory analysis,; 2.1 and 2.2) specific goals are set for citrus cropping systems 
redesigning (low-herbicide use); 3) at experimental station scale, five prototypes are tested and assessed 
with a specific grid; 4) two low-herbicide prototypes with satisfying global results are selected and transferred 
to citrus growers; the latter use decision-support indicators to monitor their practices while they integrate 
new techniques to their cropping systems. the set of ten indicators characterizes a degree of sustainability 
of the cropping system; once innovative cropping systems are running, their number on the local area leads 
to the validations of global goals; at local area scale, three indicators will assess the realization of the goals; 
5) through multi stakeholder consultation and, if need be, through a new agronomical diagnosis, new goals 
are set for the pursuance of the innovative process 
Source: Le Bellec et al. (2012)
284 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
Two workshops were held for the main actors involved in the citrus industry, and included 
farmers implementing citrus production and specialist researchers in the area of citrus 
production. A study was undertaken by the researchers with the objective of identifying 
the types of farming strategies implemented by producers and the constraints they face 
(Le Bellec et al. 2011).  While the goal of the workshop with the stakeholders was aimed at 
focusing on the design of cropping systems prototypes, the  other one for public stakeholders 
was aimed at establishing objectives for the new cropping system based on an integrated 
regional perspective. Experiments were performed at the local experimental station to 
test and adjust the prototypes to performance objectives, and an assessment tool was 
constructed to evaluate prototypes.  It was found that the two main technical constraints 
that needed to be overcome to improve Guadeloupian citrus cropping systems were: i) the 
inability to mechanise many fields due to steep slopes and stony soils;  and ii) the lack of 
producer-specific skills regarding the use of chemicals in the management of orchards. 
Based on these results, it was collectively agreed that the focus of the redesign process 
should be on the development of an alternative low-chemical weed control management 
strategy that would be compatible with the absence of mechanisation on the farms (Le Bellec 
et al. 2011).  Five weed control prototypes were jointly designed as well as two multicriteria 
assessment tools. Results indicated that farmers involved in the study independently 
transferred the new technique to their own farms, and as such automatically became pilot 
farmers.  The DISC method created an ongoing dynamic relationship between agricultural 
and public stakeholders that enabled them find solutions that can be continuously adjusted 
to stakeholder’s, expectations (Le Bellec et al. 2012).
De novo design of banana cropping systems 
Blazy et al. (2010) and Archimede et al., (2012) performed an ex ante assessment of 
agroecolgical innovations in banana production in Guadeloupe using modelling. In the 
case of Blazy et al., (2010), BANAD was used.  This is a computer bioeconomic model that 
jointly simulates bioeconomic and ‘technico-economic processes’ of resource management 
at the farm level for assessing several innovative prototypes of environmentally-friendly 
management systems. The outputs of the BANAD model are dynamic, and based on a 
weekly time-step.  They also include information on the banana production, cash flows, 
workload and environmental impacts (Figure 9.7).  The inputs of the model are the: (i) farm’s 
economic, technical and environmental characteristics; (ii) innovative crop management 
system parameters; and (iii) policy and market conditions (Blazy et al. 2010).
| 285
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Figure 9.7: The general structure of BANAD, a bio-economic farm model for 
the assessment of the impact of innovation adoption 
Source: Blazy et al. (2010)
On the other hand, the model employed by Archimede et al. (2012) was a mechanistic 
model, which was conducted at the farm level.  The outputs of this model are also dynamic, 
but are however based on a yearly time-step and relative to the crop production (total 
level of biomass of the land fallow and of each compartment of the banana plant including 
marketable and non-marketable fruits) and animal production (desired stocking rate 
of animals for the required meat production). The main input data were the total area 
286 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
dedicated to banana production, the percentage of surface to be left in fallow, the specific 
characteristics of each ruminant species and the average yield and quality of the banana 
field and its by-products (Figure 9.8).
These two models facilitated the assessment of several agroecological innovations which 
enabled the reduction or the total avoidance of the use of pesticides in fields.  The main 
innovations tested by Blazy et al. (2010) were the introduction of cultivated rotations to 
interrupt the cycle of Radopholus similis (a nematode), intercropping banana with, firstly 
Canavalia ensiformis (jack bean), a legume cover crop which can limit weed development 
and provide nitrogen to the soil without increasing the pest population (McIntyre et al. 
2001), and secondly, a new hybrid cultivar of banana that has partial resistance to the fungi 
Mycosphaerella musicola and M.	fijiensis, and which is sufficiently tolerant to the nematode 
R. similis so that fungicide and nematicide application can be avoided (Tixier et al. 2008).
 Figure 9.8: Diagrammatic representation of a ICLS based on the 
integration of banana crops, and small or large ruminants production 
 
Source: Archimede et al., (2012)
| 287
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
An innovative organic banana system consisting of an improved fallow with Crotalaria 
juncea, intercropped with C. ensiformis, new hybrid cultivar, and organic fertilisation, with 
no chemical inputs, was assessed on three different farm types (characterised according to 
their biophysical and economic parameters).  These parameters included the physical state 
of the land, and the parasite load, climate and soil types, crop rotation, management decision 
rules and manpower characteristics (cost and efficiency). Using a similar methodology, 
Archimede et al. (2012) studied the opportunity to transform monoculture banana farms 
into mixed farming systems with ruminants feeding on banana by-products (leaves, 
pseudostems and non-marketable fruits), and forage from land left fallow to break the 
cycle of the nematode R. similis.
Five theoretical farm types were established based on the following: presence or absence 
of the fallow, and the type of ruminants used (i.e. cattle, sheep, or goats). Blazy et al. (2010) 
found that the impacts of agroecological innovations vary considerably according to: i) 
the farm type in which the innovation is integrated; ii) the nature of the agroecological 
innovations; and iii) the criteria considered and the time span of the assessment.  The 
study conducted by Archimede et al. (2012) also revealed that increasing farming system 
sustainability through alternatives such as using fallow land (rotation) and the integration 
of ruminant production is feasible from a biotechnical point of view. The methodology 
employed by these two groups facilitated a rapid assessment of the relevance of innovations 
under ‘real’ farm conditions. Such assessment studies would be almost impossible to be 
made through on-farm trials, and so are more easily accommodated via the utilisation 
of computer models. This approach would enable the development of policy initiatives 
to promote the adoption of environmentally-friendly innovations, which for the sake of 
completeness would still require on-farm validation by stakeholders.
CONCLUSION
Agriculture in the region is extremely diverse and mainly driven by mixed farming systems 
which include crops and livestock and is practised mainly by rural households. This type of 
agriculture has nevertheless been excluded for a long time from the political, scientific and 
technical spheres, giving way to the promotion of export crops.  Today, in light of the MEA, 
the complex diversity and multifunctionality of such agricultural systems is being promoted 
as an innovative approach to renew productive practices for a sustainable development. 
Researchers in the region are now able to offer different methodologies to design innovative 
systems corresponding to the current societal expectations, which can either be gradual 
(step by step), or sudden (de novo).  These have been tested in Guadeloupe in response to 
certain phytosanitary restrictions faced by the banana and citrus farmers.  Other countries 
288 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
in the region can also benefit from these methodologies, which can be adapted to their 
individual realities. The adoption of these alternative technologies by farmers in our region 
should therefore be considered a priority.
REFERENCES
Alexandre, G., A. Fanchone, H. Ozier-Lafontaine, J.L. Diman. 2014.  Livestock Farming 
Systems and Agroecology in the Tropics. In Agroecology and Global Change, vol. 14, 
ed.  H. Ozier-Lafontaine and M. Lesueur-Jannoyer. Springer: n.p.
Altieri, M.A. 1995. Agroecology: The Science of Sustainable Agriculture. Boulder, CO: 
Westview Press.
Altieri, M.A., and M.V. Toledo. 2011. The Agroecological Revolution in Latin America: 
Rescuing Nature, Ensuring Food Sovereignty and Empowering Peasants. Journal 
Peasant Studies 38:587–612.
Archimède, H., J.L. Gourdine, A. Fanchone, R. Tournebize, M. Bassien-Capsa and E. 
Gonzalez-Garcia. 2012. Integrating Banana and Ruminant Production in the French 
West Indies. Tropical Animal Health and Production 44, no. 6:1289–296.
Benyus, J. 1997. Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. New York: Harper Perennial.
Blazy, JM., P. Tixier, A. Thomas, H. Ozier-Lafontaine, F. Salmon and J. Wery.  2010. 
BANAD: A Farm Model for Ex Ante Assessment of Agro-Ecological Innovations and 
Its Application to Banana Farms in Guadeloupe. Agricultural Systems 103:221–32.
Boval, M., S. Bellon and G. Alexandre. 2014. Grassland Intensification and Agroecology: 
– Case Studies in the Caribbean. In Agroecology and Global Change, vol. 14, ed.  H. 
Ozier-Lafontaine and M. Lesueur-Jannoyer, Springer: n.p.
Boval, M. and R.M. Dixon. 2012. The Importance of Grasslands for Animal Production 
and Other Functions: A Review on Management and Methodological Progress in the 
Tropics. Animal  6, no. 5:748–62. 
Brown-Uddenberg, R.C., G.W. Garcia, Q.S. Baptiste, T. Counand, O.A. Adogwa and T. 
Sampson. 2004. The Agouti [Dasyprocta leporine, D. Aguti].  Booklet and Producers’ 
Manual. St Augustine, Trinidad: The University of the West Indies.
Cornet, D. 2005. Systèmes de cultures associées a base d’igname et gestion des plantes 
adventices. Année académique 2004–2005, Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques de 
Gembloux. 
Dawson, T., and R. Fry. 1998. Agriculture in Nature’s Image. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13:50–51.
Dedieu, B., J. Aubin, G. Duteurtre, G. Alexandre, J. Vayssières, P. Bommel and B. Faye. 
2011. Conception et évaluation de systèmes d’élevage durables en régions chaudes à 
l’échelle de l’exploitation. INRA Productions Animales 24:113–28.
| 289
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Delve, R.J., G. Cadisch, J.C. Tanner, W. Thorpe, P.J. Thorne, K.E. Giller. 2001. Implications 
of Livestock Feeding Management on Soil Fertility in Smallholder Farming Systems of 
Sub-Saharan Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 84:227–43.
Doré, T., D. Makowski, E. Malezieux, N. Munier-Jolain, M. Tchamitchian and P. Tittonell. 
2011. Facing up to the Paradigm of Ecological Intensification in Agronomy: Revisiting 
Methods, Concepts and Knowledge. Europ. J. Agronomy 34, no. 4:197–210. DOI: 
10.1016/j.eja.2011.02.006.
Duran-Zuazo, V.H., and C.R. Rodriguez-Pleguezuelo. 2008. Soil-Erosion and Runoff 
Prevention by Plant Covers: A Review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 
28:65–86.
Ecophyto. 2008. http://agriculture.gouv.fr/ecophyto-2018. Accessed June 28, 2011.
Ewel, J. 1999. Natural Systems as Models for the Design of Sustainable Systems of Land 
Use. Agroforestry Systems 45:1–21. 
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO). 1994. Tropical Soybeans: 
An Improvement and Production. Plant Production and Protection Series, no. 27. 
Rome: FAO.
Funes-Monzote, F., and M. Monzote. 2001. Integrated Agroecological Systems as a Way 
Forward for Cuban Agriculture. http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd13/1/fune131.htm. Accessed 
September 26, 2013. 
Funes-Monzote, F.R. 2009. Agricultura con futuro. La alternativa agroecológica para Cuba. 
Estación Experimental ‘Indio Hatuey’, Universidad de Matanzas.
Garcia, G.W. 2005. Neotropical Wildlife Conservation, Production, Utilization, Cuisine, 
Vol. 2. St Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago: GWG Publications.
Gliessman, S.R. 2009. Animals in Agroecosystems. In Agroecology: The Ecology Of 
Sustainable Food Systems.  2nd ed.  New York: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis.
González-García, E., J.L. Gourdine, G. Alexandre, H. Archimède and M. Vaarst. 2012. 
The Complex Nature of Mixed Farming Systems Requires Multidimensional Actions 
Supported by Integrative Research and Development Efforts. Animal 6, no. 5:763–77. 
Herrero, M., P.K. Thornton, A.M. Notenbaert, S. Wood, S. Msangi, H.A. Freeman, D. Bossio, 
J. Dixon, M. Peters, J. Van de Steeg, J. Lynam, P.P. Rao, S. Macmillan, B. Gerard, J. 
McDermott, C. Sere and M. Rosegrant. 2010. Smart Investments in Sustainable Food 
Production: Revisiting Mixed Crop-Livestock Systems. Science 227(5967): 822–25.
Herrero, M., P.K. Thornton, A. Notenbaert, S. Msangi, S. Wood, R. Kruska, J. Dixon, D. 
Bossio, J. Van de Steeg, H. Ade Freeman, X. Li, and P. Parthasarathy Rao. 2009. Drivers 
of Change in Crop-Livestock Systems and Their Potential Impacts on Agro-Ecosystems 
Services and Human Well-Being to 2030. Nairobi, Kenya: CGIAR Systemwide Livestock 
Programme, ILRI.
290 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
Hipps, N.A., and T.J. Samuelson. 1991. Effects of Long-Term Herbicide Use, Irrigation and 
Nitrogen Fertiliser on Soil Fertility in an Apple Orchard. J. Sci. Food Agric. 55:377–87.
Holling, C.S. 2001. Understanding the Complexity of Economic, Ecological, and Social 
Systems. Ecosystems 4:390–405.
IAASTD. 2008. Executive Summary of the Synthesis Report of the International Assessment 
of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). http://
www.agassessment.org. Accessed January 23, 2011.
Jolliffe, P.A. 1997. Are Mixed Populations of Plant Species More Productive Than Pure 
Stands? Acta Oecologica Scandinavica (OIKOS) 80, no. 3:595–602.
Khan, Z.R., .W.A. Overholt, A. Hassanali, P. Chiliswa, J. Wandera, F. Muyekho, J.A. Pickett, 
L.E. Smart and L.J. Wadhams. 1998. An Integrated Management of Cereal Stem Borers 
and Striga Weed in Maize Based Cropping System in Africa. In Proceedings of the 
6th Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Maize Conference on Maize Production 
Technology for the Future: Challenges and Opportunities, CIMMYT (International 
Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre) and EARO (Ethiopian Agricultural Research).
Kinzig, A.P., P. Ryan, M. Etienne, H. Allison, T. Elmqvist and B.H. Walker. 2006. Resilience 
and Regime Shifts: Assessing Cascading Effects. Ecology and Society 11, no. 1:20. 
Lavigne, A., E. Dumbardon-Martial and C. Lavigne. 2012. Poultry for Biological Control of 
Weeds in Orchards. Fruit 67:341–51.
Le Bail, M. 2000. Qualité des produits végétaux et territoire: contribution de l’agronome 
[Vegetal products quality and territorial development] Oléagineux, Corps gras, Lipides 
7:499–503.
Le Bellec, F., P. Cattan, M. Bonin and A. Rajaud. 2011. Building a Typology of Cropping 
Practices from Comparison to a Common Reference: First Step for a Relevant Cropping 
System Re-Designing Process-Results for Tropical Citrus Production. Fruits 66:143–59.
Le Bellec, F., Rajaud, A., Ozier-Lafontaine, H., Bockstaller, C. and Malezieux, E. 2012. 
Evidence for Farmers’ Active Involvement in Co-Designing Citrus Cropping Systems 
Using an Improved Participatory Method. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 
32, no. 3:703–714.
Liang, W. 1998. Farming Systems as an Approach to Agro-Ecological Engineering. Ecological 
Engineering 11:27–35.
Lhoste, P., V. Dollé, J. Rousseau and D. Soltner. 1993. Zootechnie des régions chaudes. 
Les systèmes d’élevage. Paris, Ministère de la Coopération-CIRAD. Manuels et précis 
d’élevage.
Lyonga, S.N. 1980. Aspects économiques de la culture de l’igname au Cameroun. In Plantes-
racines tropicales: stratégies de recherches pour les années 1980, compte rendu du 
| 291
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
premier symposium triennal sur les plantes-racines de l’ISTRC-AB, ed.  E.R. Terry, 
K.A. Oduro and F. Caveness, 219–24. Ibadan, Nigeria: IITA.
Ma, S., and S.M. Swinton. 2011. Valuation of Ecosystem Services from Rural Landscapes 
Using Agricultural Land Prices. Ecological Economics 70:1649–59.
Masera, O.,  Y.M. Astier and  S. López-Ridaura. 1999. Sustentabilidad y Manejo de Recursos 
Naturales. El marco de Evaluación MESMIS. MundiPrensa – GIRA –UNAM, México.
McIntyre, B.D., C.S. Gold, I.N. Kashaija, H. Ssali, G. Night and D.P. Bwamiki. 2001. Effects 
of Legume Intercrops on Soil-Borne Pests, Biomass, Nutrients and Soil Water in Banana. 
Biology and Fertility of Soils 34:342–48. 
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: 
Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press, World Resources Institute.
Meynard, J.M., F. Aggeri, J.B. Coulon, R. Habib and J.P. Tillon. 2006. Conception de 
systems agricoles innovants [Design of innovative agricultural systems] Report to the 
INRA National Head. 
Meynard, J.M., B. Dedieu and B. Bos. 2012. Re-Design and Co-Design of Farming Systems: 
An Overview of Methods and Practices. In Farming Systems Research into the 21st 
Century: The New Dynamic, ed. I. Darnhofer, D. Gibbon, and B. Dedieu, 407–431. 
Dordrecht: Springer.
Midmore, D.J. 1993w. Agronomic Modification of Resource Use and Intercrop Productivity. 
Field Crops Research 34:357–80.
Morris, R.A., and D.P. Garrity. 1993. Resource Capture and Utilization in Intercropping: 
Water. Field Crops Research 34:303–317.
Mundler, P., and L. Rumpus. 2012. The Energy Efficiency of Local Food Systems: A 
Comparison between Different Modes of Distribution. Journal of 37, no. 6:609–615.
Nogueira-Fihlo, S.L.G., D.O. Santos, A. Mendes and S.S. da Cunha Nogueira. 2010. 
Developping Diets for Collared Peccary from Locally Available Food Resources in 
Bahia, Brazil. In Memorias manejo de fauna sylvestre en Amazonia y Latinoamérica, 
IXCIMFAUNA, Mayo 10–19, 2010, 458–63. Santa Cruz, Bolivia
Obedoni, B.O., J.K. Mensah and S.O. Isesele Obedoni. 2005. Effects of Intercropping 
Cowpea {Vigna Unguiculata (Walp} and Tomato (Lycopersicon Esculentum Mill)) on 
Their Growth, Yield and Monetary Returns. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research 
39, no. 4: 286–90.
Odurukwe, S.O. 1986. Yam-Maize Intercropping Investigations in Nigeria. Tropical 
Agriculture 63, no. 1:17–21.
Ozier-Lafontaine, H., M. Publicol, J.M., Blazy and C. Melfort. 2011. SIMSERV: Expert 
System of Assistance to the Selection of Plants of Service for Various Agro-Ecological 
292 |
Ecological Modernization of Caribbean Agrosystems: From Concept to Design
and Socio-Economic Contexts. Licence CeCILL (http://www.cecill.info/index.en.html). 
http://toolsforagroecology.antilles.inra.fr/simserv. Accessed January 16, 2014.
Valet, S., and H. Ozier-Lafontaine. 2014. Ecosystemic Services of Multispecific and 
Multistratified Cropping Systems. In Agroecology and Global Change, vol.14, ed. by 
H. Ozier-Lafontaine and M. Lesueur-Jannoyer. Springer: n.p. (in press).
Parayil, G. 2003. Mapping Technological Trajectories of the Green Revolution and the 
Gene Revolution from Modernization to Globalization. Research Policy 32:971–990.
Preston, T.R. 2009. Sustainable Production of Food, Feed and Fuel from Natural Resources 
in the Tropics. Tropical Animal Health and Production 41:1071–1080.
Preston, T.R., and L. Rodríguez. 2013. Production of Food and Energy from Biomass in 
an Integrated Farming System, Experiences from the TOSOLY Farm in Colombia. 
Sustainable Agriculture Reviews (accepted).
Preston, T.R., and L. Rodríguez. 2014. Production of Food and Energy from Biomass in 
an Integrated Farming System; Experiences from the TOSOLY Farm in Colombia. In 
Agroecology and Global Change, vol.14, ed. H. Ozier-Lafontaine and M. Lesueur-
Jannoyer, n.p.: Springer (in press).
Rämert, B., M. Lennartsson and G. Davies. 2002. The Use of Mixed Species Cropping to 
Manage Pests and Diseases Theory and Practices. In Proceedings of the COR Conference, 
ed. Powel et al., 207–210. Aberystwth: UK Organic Research.
Rey-Novoa, J.M., and F.R. Funes-Monzote. 2013. La familia campesina Rey-Novo una 
transicion agroecologica. Agricultures Network 29, no. 4:12–15.
Risch, S.J. 1983. Intercropping as Cultural Pest Control: Prospects and Limitations. 
Environmental Management 7:9–14.
Root, R.B. 1973. Organization of a Plant-Arthropod Association in Simple and Diverse 
Habitats – Fauna of Collards (Brassica oleracea). Ecological Monographs 4:95–120.
Suárez, J., and G.J. Martín. 2012. La biomasa como fuente renovable de energía en el medio 
rural: La experiencia del proyecto internacional BIOMAS-CUBA. Estación Experimental 
‘Indio Hatuey’, Matanzas, Cuba.
Susesh, K.K., and R.S.S. Vinaya. 1987. Studies on the Allelopathic Effects of Some 
Agroforestry Tree Crops. International Tree Crops Journal 4:109–115.
Szumigalski, A., and V. Rene. 2005. Weed Suppression and Crop Production in Annual 
Intercrops. Weed Science 53:813–25.
Tixier, P., E. Malézieux, M. Dorel and J. Wery. 2008. SIMBA, a Model for Designing 
Sustainable Banana-Based Cropping Systems. Agricultural Systems 97:139–50.
Trenbath, B.R. 1999. Multispecies Cropping Systems in India. Prediction of Their 
Productivity, Stability, Resilience and Ecological Sustainability. Agroforestry Systems 
45:81–107.
| 293
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Tsubo, M., S. Walker and E. Mukhala. 2001. Comparisons of Radiation Use Efficiency of 
Mono-/Inter-Cropping Systems with Different Row Orientations. Field Crops Research 
71:17–29.
Valet, S. 1999. L’aménagement traditionnel des versants et le maintien des cultures associées 
traditionnelles: cas de l’Ouest-Cameroun. Colloque International ‘L’ homme et l’Erosion’. 
IRD-CIRAD. BP 5045, Montpellier, 34032, France. December 12–15,1999. Yaoundé, 
Cameroun. 17.
Vandermeer, J.H. 1989. The Ecology of Intercropping. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge 
University Press.
Vanloqueren, G., and V. Baret. 2009. How Agricultural Research Systems Shape a 
Technological Regime That Develops Genetic Engineering but Locks out Agroecological 
Innovations. Research Policy 38:971–83.
Veldkamp, A., A.C. Van Altvorst, R. Eweg, E. Jacobsen, A. Van Kleef, H. Van Latesteijn, 
S. Mager, H. Mommaas, P.J.A.M. Smeets, L. Spaans and J.C.M. Van Trijp. 2009. 
Triggering Transitions towards Sustainable Development of the Dutch Agricultural 
Sector: Transforum’s Approach. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 29:87–96. 
Walker, B., C.S. Holling, S.R. Carpenter and A. Kinzig. 2004. Resilience, Adaptability and 
Transformability in Social-Ecological Systems. Ecology and Society 9, no. 2:5. 
Willey, R.W. 1979. Intercropping – Its Importance and Research Neads. Part I: Competition 
and Yield Advantage; Part II: Agronomy and Research Approaches. Field crops. Abstr. 
32, no. 1 and 2:1–10. 
Young, G.M., C.H.O. Lallo, H. Archimede, G. Legall, G.W. Garcia. 2012. Voluntary Feed 
Intake and Preference of Locally Available Feeds by the Collared Peccary (Tayassu 
tajacu/Pecari tajacu) a Neo-Tropical Animal, Farmed in Trinidad, Republic of Trinidad 
and Tobago. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 24, Article #195. http://www.
lrrd.org/lrrd24/11/youn24195.htm. Accessed September 12, 2013.
Zhang, W., T.H. Ricketts, C. Kremen, K. Carney and S.M. Swinton. 2007. Ecosystem Services 
and Dis-Services to Agriculture. Ecological Economics 64:253–60.
294 |
Figure 7.3: Algal growth (green) associated with animal manure
| 295
CHAPTER SEVEN
Figure 7.4: Solid and liquid waste from feedlot
296 |
Figure 8.2: Skin colour at different stages of maturity and ripening cv. Long
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
Figure 8.3: Flesh colour at different stages of ripening cv. Long
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
| 297
CHAPTER EIGHT
Figure 8.4: Latex stains on harvested fruits
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
Figure 8.5: Various types of physical damages
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
Figure 8.6: Mango seed weevil 
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
298 |
Figure 8.8: Fresh-cut mango slices in retail market
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
Figure 8.9: Frozen mango chunks
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
| 299
Figure 8.10: Mango value-added products
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
Figure 8.11: Anthracnose infections on cv. Julie mango fruit
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
300 |
Figure 8.12: Scale insect damage 
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
Figure 8.13: Bird damage 
Source: Mohammed and Craig (2014)
| 301
Figure 9.4: An example of a Creole garden which involves the growing 
of annual and biennial agricultural crops along with forest species.
Photo by Magalie Lesieur-Jannoyer 
 Figure 9.5: An example of multispecies system in a Guadeloupe farm
Photo by H. Ozier-Lafontaine
302 |
CHAPTER NINE
Agricultural Diversification and 
Non-Traditional Systems for 
Sustainable Food Production
Leighton Naraine, Stuart LaPlace, Clare Bowen-O’Connor, 
Amenold Pierre and Kevin Meehan
INTRODUCTION
This chapter considers the challenge of creating a sustainable supply 
of food for local consumption in the Caribbean with some potential for 
export.  While it is important to note recent trends in large-scale production, 
including a long decline in plantation systems geared for the export of single 
crops, and more recent attempts to boost commercial farming for delivery 
to niche export markets, the focus here is not primarily on commercial or 
export agriculture.  Rather, the chapter looks at recent and emerging efforts 
to implement non-traditional systems geared for small-scale farming. 
These systems are aimed at strengthening local food security and adapting 
traditional farming methods in the face of rapidly changing climates.   In the 
context of this chapter, traditional agriculture is considered as the cultivation 
of crops in the ground, depending mainly on rainfall and with minimal use 
of irrigation.  It is a system practiced widely for the past several decades and 
even centuries in the Caribbean.  
The following pages focus mainly on the production of food crops, with 
some mention of livestock.  Drawing mostly on examples from the Eastern 
Caribbean and Haiti, the authors describe a range of non-traditional 
techniques currently being developed in the region.  A more detailed look 
at one non-traditional approach spearheaded by researchers in St Kitts and 
Nevis is then provided. This system, founded at Clarence Fitzroy Bryant 
College (CFBC) in St Kitts is now poised for implementation in Nevis, 
Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana and Haiti. It blends protected 
C H A P T E R  TEN
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
agriculture shade house technology with a combination of hydroponics, organoponics, and 
hybridponics growing systems.  The prospect summed up in the conclusion is to confront 
barriers of regional fragmentation and vulnerability with regional collaborations that 
transfer knowledge, adapt it to community-based needs, and improve food security and 
social resilience at the local level throughout the Caribbean.
DIVERSIFICATION: FROM EXPORT AGRICULTURE TO LOCAL 
FOOD PRODUCTION
In most Caribbean countries, particularly in the smaller island nations, food imports 
have been increasing while exports of agricultural products have been decreasing, as seen 
in Figure 10.1.  
Figure 10.1: Trends in CARICOM agricultural trade
Source: FAOSTAT (2013)
304 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
Figure 10.2:  Food imports and exports in St Kitts-Nevis 
Source: St Kitts Planning Unit, Department of Statistics (2005)
The situation in St Kitts and Nevis as illustrated in Figure 10.2 is typical of the trend 
among its Caribbean counterparts. Agricultural production for local consumption has also 
been decreasing and, in the case of St Kitts and Nevis, the contribution of agriculture to 
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) accounted for only 4.5  percent in 2000, with sugar cane 
accounting for close to half of that amount.
Many Caribbean economists, historians, and other writers on the political economy 
of agriculture in the region (Marie 1979; Codrington 1984; Marshall 1991; Barrow 1992; 
Beckford 1994) have pointed out that plantation systems for commercial crops such 
as sugar and bananas tended to de-emphasize food production for local consumption 
thereby creating a dependence on imports.  Indeed, the plantation economies have shaped 
Caribbean agriculture practices for centuries with an export-oriented focus on cash crops, 
while local food production remained minimal. Given the legacy of the plantation system, 
Caribbean people often find themselves without the necessary mindsets or practical models 
| 305
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
to develop and implement new approaches to growing food, making the problem of local 
food production an even more severe challenge. The plantation system, while it casts a 
long historical shadow, was in decline more than a century before the recent final closure 
of sugar mills in Barbados, Trinidad and Toboago, and St Kitts and massive down-sizing 
in other countries.  As many as five decades ago, some Caribbean countries began making 
attempts to manage the shift away from plantation economies and simultaneously address 
the problem of local food production.   Initially, these efforts took place within a framework 
of agricultural diversification, and more recently have been motivated by additional concerns 
about food security and rapidly intensifying climate change.   
According to Wilson and Bekele (1999), agricultural diversification refers to increasing 
the range of agricultural output at farm, sectoral or regional levels either through expanding 
the number of crop or livestock species produced, or by vertical integration of one or 
more species into a diversified product mix, through processing.  With such processing, 
diversification could also be achieved by internationally sourcing raw material, e.g. fresh 
fruit to achieve all year manufacture of products for an export market or continuous supply 
of local demand.  
Beginning in the mid-1960s and carrying through to the late-1990s, studies undertaken 
at the Caribbean Community Secretariat, the Faculty of Agriculture of the University of the 
West Indies (UWI), and the Caribbean Food and Nutrition Institute (CFNI) indicate both 
the technical and economic feasibility of substantially increased production of food in the 
countries of the region.   Under the rubric of ‘agricultural diversification’, Demas (1987) and 
Wilson and Bekele (1999) elaborated planning strategies to manage a shift away from the 
plantation model of Caribbean agriculture. Three main elements in a successful approach to 
diversified farming were proposed by Demas (1987).  First is the intensification of traditional 
crop production by increasing productivity through technologically advanced farming 
practices and irrigation, and by adding value through further processing, thereby generating 
alternative products from the raw material of traditional crops. Second, is the increased 
production of non-traditional crops for national and regional consumption, and third, is the 
increased production of non-traditional crops for export to extra-regional markets. Wilson 
and Bekele (1999) recognized the existence of operational models for expanding the export 
of niche products such as hot peppers, aloes, and Sea Island cotton, and for increasing the 
productivity of crops and livestock for local food markets throughout the region. Arguing 
that claims about agricultural diversification remain arbitrary and subjective without the 
use of quantitative models to determine whether or not diversification has taken place, 
Wilson and Bekele (1999) also contributed more quantitative assessment tools to measure 
productivity, sustainability, competitiveness, and flexibility.  
306 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
Trejos and de las Casas (1997) argued for hemispheric integration to boost food 
production, as well as for a comprehensive model of sustainable development resting on 
three pillars:  participation by producers and organizations; reconversion of production 
structures, to make them more efficient when overhauled, and enable products to secure a 
better market position, while conserving resources and increasing equity; and institutional 
transformation for the improvement of their ability to respond to the demands and needs of 
agricultural producers and to serve as facilitators to streamline relations among institutions 
in the framework of sustainable development. 
Against the backdrop of these preceding decades of scholarship on efforts to shift 
Caribbean agriculture by introducing the need for sustainable food production practices, 
Naraine (2005) surveyed the state of domestic agricultural production in St Kitts. 
Historically dominated by the oldest sugar plantation system in the region, monocrop 
cultivation occupied the major portion of arable land and the most productive soils, leaving 
food crop and livestock production to peasant farmers on the fringes with small, scattered 
land holdings.  Over the decades, farmers toiled against the vagaries of weather, mostly 
on hillsides, and depended on rain-fed systems to a large extent.  Traditional producers 
also faced declining soil fertility on already marginal land, poor infrastructure, outmoded 
technology, lack of service support and expertise, and lack of sufficient institutional 
support from either governmental entities, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), or 
community based organizations (CBOs).  In addition, lack of access to credit, low prices 
for their produce with seasonal oversupply which was quickly followed by scarcity in off-
season periods, lack of marketing systems, nuisances of dog attacks on livestock, monkeys 
and stray-roaming livestock feeding on food crops, and, not infrequently, environmental 
disasters attributed to severe storms and hurricanes, have all compounded to negatively 
impact agricultural development. More recently, the issue of competition with lower-
priced imported produce at the market highlighted some of the disadvantages associated 
with globalization.  Opening up national boundaries and lowering tariffs to increase trade 
constitute a cost to local companies that are, in most cases, ill-equipped to compete at the 
global level and are therefore marginalized (Barker 2012). 
Evaluating agricultural diversification
Naraine (2005) evaluated the extent of agricultural diversification in St. Kitts using an 
adapted version of the Shannon Index of Entropy (SIE), represented by the formula (Masisi, 
et al. 2008): 
(It) = Σn - pit  [1n (pit)]
| 307
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
where, (It) is a measure of diversification in agricultural systems, using as the basic factor, the 
proportion of total revenue, pit from the i
th (i =1,2,…n, where n ≥ 1) agricultural commodity 
in year (t).  Thus, a perfectly diversified agricultural system would have an entropy index 
of log (n) and a perfectly specialized system with one commodity an index of zero (0), 
with the parameters for evaluating diversification to include: productivity, sustainability, 
competitiveness, and flexibility. This model may be adapted to calculate diversification 
(SIE) for individual countries or the Caribbean, collectively.  However, diversification at 
the regional or national level alone is not sufficient to measure the success of agricultural 
diversification in the Caribbean. Naraine (2005) further argued that the success of the 
sector depends on the individual success of farmers or enterprises, and that national or 
regional success hinges upon the cumulative effect of individual productivity, sustainability, 
competitiveness, and flexibility.  
Applying the SIE, Naraine (2005) found a low level of diversification of approximately 
two crop types at the enterprise level in St Kitts in 2005, affecting food production.  The 
optimum determined by the SIE is five crop types (leafy greens, beans, ground provisions, 
tomato, herbs and peppers) that would correlate with optimum productivity, particularly 
when there is a total of approximately five crop and livestock types combined. Such integrated 
farms benefit from sustainability with multiple revenue streams, ecological considerations 
with effective recycling, and flexibility when faced with varying market changes.  
In the intervening decade, discussions have shifted away from viewing Caribbean 
agricultural diversification as a way of replacing foreign exchange losses due to failing 
export crops. Instead, there has been greater emphasis on boosting local production 
through developing non-traditional farming techniques. Because of this, SIE results may 
now vary, and current data, if gathered for the same variables as in 2005, may reveal that 
diversification has improved with a corresponding improvement in food production with 
the introduction of the non-traditional systems identified later in this chapter.
Adaptation to climate change
Trotz (2007) asserts that over the last 15–20 years, climate change has emerged as a major 
concern for small-island and low-lying coastal developing states of the Caribbean region. 
Impacts ranging from loss of life and food security to saltwater intrusion into aquifers and 
breakdown of law and order may be extended to Small Island Developing States (SIDS) 
throughout the world.   
The intensification of these trends is confirmed in recent reports from the National 
Academy of Sciences (2013) and the Royal Society (2014).  Barker (2012) directly links 
climate changes to a crisis in Caribbean agriculture, as increasingly irregular rain patterns 
308 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
and more extreme tropical weather events compound the stresses and shocks imposed 
by globalization.  With the view that climate change is negatively impacting the physical 
environment and, in turn, human lives, livelihoods, and biodiversity, it is prudent for all 
societies to act to minimize the impacts upon the environment and communities. 
Minimizing impacts is typically achieved with mitigation, but there is a growing trend 
with the adaptation approach to climate change.  Mitigation tends to be more of a reactive 
approach, while adaptation, by making decisions with foresight based on potential risks, is 
essentially proactive and can be more feasible and effective towards long-term solutions. 
Simoes et al. (2010) identified the characteristics and benefits of adaptation to climate 
change, using examples from northeast Brazil.  The main lesson to be learned from that case 
is the need for building adaptive capacity at all educational and skill levels, both formal and 
non-formal. Adaptive capacity is essential for people in communities to adapt to changing 
climatic conditions and related environmental degradation.  
The immediacy of climate change and the need to adapt adds another layer of urgency 
to the question of agricultural diversification, and it was with that in mind that faculty and 
students at the CFBC, St.Kitts-Nevis, have experimented since 2006 with non-traditional 
plant growing systems as an adaptation strategy to climate change. They have developed 
growing systems (hydroponics, organoponics, and hybridponics) that demonstrate 
documented high productivity, despite the challenges encountered by Caribbean farmers 
due to climate change impacts, land scarcity and competition with other sectors for land, 
and a host of other environmental and human impacts that negatively affect production 
of garden vegetables.  
From 2010 forward, the CFBC collaborated with researchers and students from the 
University of Central Florida to move beyond experimentation by demonstrating ‘proof of 
concept’ on a production-scale design of growing systems.  In addition to building shade 
house growing systems for hydroponics (44.6 m2) and organoponics (37.2 m2), and using 
them in tandem to create a novel hybridponics growing method, faculty-student teams 
have conducted marketing research in the field to generate a model for commercializing 
crop outputs and estimating livelihood potential. The data presented in student research 
submitted for the Caribbean Advanced Proficiency Exam (CAPE©) assessments and at the 
2013 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Sub-
regional Conference on Environmental Policy and Planning for the Caribbean indicated 
that output from this system is profitable enough to generate a competitive income of 
more than EC$2,000 (US$740) per month. This system is profiled in greater detail in the 
following discussion, but first we present a survey of recent efforts to develop non-traditional 
techniques throughout the region.
| 309
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
NON-TRADITIONAL AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS IN PRACTICE
In addition to the techniques of hydroponics, organoponics and hybridoponics proposed 
in this chapter, there are several relevant examples of non-traditional agricultural practices 
throughout the region, which offer the opportunity to use new varieties and move away 
from the traditional plantation-style monoculture systems. Additionally, these practices 
are less tedious and therefore more attractive to youth who are less inclined to venture 
into the traditional drudgery of plantation-style or open-field farming.  Several new and 
improved techniques have been introduced to the region within the last 20 years.  In the 
case of crops for example, varietal trials, tissue culture, protected agriculture systems and 
low-cost alternatives, coordinated urban and peri-urban systems in the form of backyard 
and school gardens, and hydroponics have been implemented to increase food production. 
For livestock, artificial insemination is being used in St Kitts and Nevis to reduce the 
importation of live animals.
Varietal trials for heat tolerant tomatoes
Varietal trials are useful for the introduction of new cultivars (commonly referred to by 
producers as varieties) to the agricultural sector, which are chosen for optimum performance 
in the field, high yields and market acceptance. Varietal trials require controlled conditions 
and consistent data collection, and in the case of St Kitts and Nevis, with a hot, dry climate, 
the selection of heat tolerant cultivars is important. Farmers have reported that the annual 
drought is longer and the annual rains during the rainy season have become progressively 
more intense within the last 10 years, something which is evidenced by the frequency of 
forest fires during the dry periods and the increasing intensity of flooding throughout the 
region. The Department of Agriculture (DoA), St Kitts and Nevis, embarked on a series of 
varietal trials to select the most suitable varieties for production of various crops.
Varietal selection
There are many heat tolerant varieties on the market internationally with new ones being 
released frequently; therefore, it is important to research the varieties before selection. 
Varieties may be determinate (the plant dies after a single fruiting), or indeterminate (plants 
continue to grow and fruit until killed or removed by grower).  As these require different 
management techniques, growers must determine which type is most suitable for their 
application.  Determinate varieties require minimal staking or support and minimal pruning. 
Indeterminate varieties require extensive support and pruning, and although removal of 
suckers is highly recommended, it is not mandatory. It is important to choose high quality 
seed from reputable seed companies to attain best seed germination and crop productivity.
310 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
Field preparation and layout
For uniformity, areas should be selected that are free from shade and level where 
possible, otherwise, the field should be divided into blocks with uniform characteristics 
before planting.  The soil should be tilled and banked in rows with 0.91 m spacing between 
ridges to allow for adequate drainage.  Rows should run in the direction of the contours 
whenever possible to reduced erosion.  Drip irrigation tubing of 1.3 cm diameter should be 
used with 45.7 cm spacing between emitters.  Rows should be covered with plastic mulch 
to reduce weeds and water loss due to surface evaporation.  The size of the trial plot would 
be determined by the number of varieties to be tested.  
Seed germination and planting
General seed germination practices should be followed to ensure seedling uniformity. 
Firstly, calculate the number of seeds to sow for each variety depending on number of 
replications.  More replications are required if the field is not uniform as the field will need 
to be divided into blocks.  Sterilise seedling trays, mix growing media (e.g. ProMix®), with 
slow release fertiliser and apply evenly to seedling trays, and place one seed per cell.  Finally, 
cover the seeds with a light covering of growing media and water gently to prevent seeds from 
being dislodged from the cells.  Ensure only one cultivar is sown per tray and that trays are 
properly labelled with the cultivar name.  Trays may be placed in a germination chamber or 
shade house dedicated to seedling germination. The seedlings should be frequently checked 
to ensure the media is sufficiently moist. Once plants have achieved three to four true leaves 
and attain a height of 10–15 cm they may be transplanted to the field.  
For a uniform field, varieties should be randomly assigned to rows using random number 
tables. For a field with blocks, varieties should be assigned randomly to rows within 
blocks. A field map should be prepared to record the layout of the varieties, and standard 
fertilisation practices should be employed.  Seven to ten days after transplanting, a complete 
fertiliser should be applied.  About six weeks after transplanting, at the onset of flowering, 
a potassium-rich fertiliser should be applied to encourage flowering and fruit set.  Data 
collection for each cultivar should include pest resistance, crop yield, and presence of wilting 
and nutrient deficiency.  In keeping with good agricultural practices, records should be kept 
on inputs for calculation of the cost of production.  Market acceptability and organoleptic 
(taste) assessments are required to determine the suitability of the best performing varieties 
for introduction to the market.
In 2013, the DoA, St. Kitts and Nevis, successfully tested four Israeli tomato cultivars to 
replace the commonly used Heatmaster and Heatwave.  The cultivar HA3080 had the lowest 
yields, while HA3019, HA3057, and HA3091 had similar yields to Heatmaster (Table 10.1).
| 311
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
  Table 10.1: Results from tomato varietal trial comparing four Israeli 
cultivars
Variety Yield (kg/ha)
HA 3019 9,000
HA 3057 9,000
HA 3091 10,000
Heatmaster 9,500
HA 3080 6,000
Source: Jackson (2014)
The cultivars were selected based on similar visual fruit characteristics, heat tolerance and 
availability.  In St Kitts, visual characteristics are a major determinant of public acceptance. 
Thus, with the exception of HA3080, the tested Israeli cultivars are suitable replacements 
for the two common varieties. Time constraints represented a major shortcoming to such 
varietal trials as they limit the length of the trials.  As such, it is commonplace for organoleptic 
testing and market viability studies to be eliminated before introduction, and conducted 
while the crop is on the market.  This has led to several cultivars being withdrawn from the 
market as a result of the taste not meeting the expectations of the consumer.
Tissue culture 
Plant tissue culture, as a non-traditional method for generating propagules, has been 
successfully adopted in several Caribbean territories (Table 10.2).  Since 1994, significant 
increases in propagation were realised in root crops, banana and orchids throughout 
the region. The Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI) 
and International Co-operative Development Fund (ICDF), Taiwan, have contributed 
significantly to this development.  
General process 
Plant tissue culture, in vitro propagation or micro-propagation is the process of 
propagating plant material (cell, tissues or organs) in an aseptic (i.e. free of pathogenic 
organisms) controlled environment using nutrient media.  
312 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
Table 10.2: Tissue culture laboratories in various Caribbean countries and 
major crops produced
Country Agency Crop
St Lucia Ministry of Agriculture Yam, Orchid, Banana
St Vincent and the Ministry of Agriculture Banana, root crops (30 varieties cassava; 
Grenadines 24 Varieties sweet potato)
Belize University of Belize Papaya, Sugar cane, Pumpkin, Citrus, 
Banana, Plantain, Orchid
Grenada Ministry of Agriculture Nutmeg, Banana, Spices, Plantain, 
Orchids, Cassava
Barbados Ministry of Agriculture Cassava
Barbados West Indies Board of Germplasm research on sugar cane
Breeding
Trinidad and Tobago Ministry of Agriculture Cassava
Trinidad and Tobago The University of the Cassava, Anthuriums, Orchids, Banana, 
West Indies Sweet Potato
Trinidad and Tobago Tobago House of Cassava, Yam, Sweet potato
Assembly
Source: Adapted from Gonzalez (2010)
Plant material preparation
Plant material may be collected from field plots or from their native habitat. Before 
it is transferred to the laboratory, where possible, sterilise the material and propagate 
using traditional methods in a greenhouse to reduce the amount of surface contaminants 
introduced to the lab. The samples collected from the greenhouse-propagated material 
should also be freed of loose contaminants and debris with running water for a few minutes. 
Cut the material into suitable lengths and surface sterilise with low to medium percentage 
bleach-wash containing one or two drops of dishwashing liquid.  The sterilisation process 
needs to be optimised for each crop as the time to decontamination varies. Keep in mind 
that 100 percent decontamination is not always achieved so cultures should be monitored 
frequently.
Media selection and preparation
Many media preparations are a modification of Murashige-Skoog standard for media 
preparation (Murashige-Skoog 1962) and vary by the type and amounts of macro- and 
micronutrients, vitamins, carbohydrate source, and plant growth regulators or plant 
| 313
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
hormones, the latter two of which are used to regulate the growth and development of the 
cultured plants.  The media are available pre-packaged, from a number of international 
suppliers.1  Alternatively, media recipes can be found in several publications, for example, 
Saad and Elshahed (2012).  Great care must be taken when preparing media.  The order 
of addition of components must be strictly followed to prevent undesirable side reactions 
and precipitation of salts.  Once prepared, media must be sterilised either by filtration, 
ultraviolet light, or autoclaved (steam steriliser or pressure cooker), and then decanted into 
the desired culture container (e.g. test tubes, petri-dishes, baby food jars, magenta boxes).
Culture initiation and sub-culture
All steps from the sterilisation of plant material to root initiation need to be performed 
in an enclosed lab environment using a specialised piece of equipment, the laminar flow 
hood, in which air flow is in one direction toward the user.  The sterilised plant material 
is cut into smaller pieces (explants) and placed on culture media and observed daily for 
signs of growth and contamination.  If contamination occurs, remove the contaminated 
container, autoclave and discard the material.  Culture containers may be re-used if they 
are made of glass or specialised plastic.  Growing cultures may be sub-divided and placed 
on fresh media every three to four weeks depending on the rate of growth, a process called 
sub-culturing.  Because nutrients in the medium are used by the explant, therefore frequent 
sub-culturing is necessary.  
Rooting and acclimation
After several rounds of sub-culturing, shoots are transferred to a rooting medium, which 
may or may not contain the plant growth regulators, auxin or cytokinin, or a combination 
of both.  This is dependent on the plant in culture, and has to be optimised for each plant 
type.  Rooting cultures are then hardened or acclimated through a series of steps.  The total 
number of steps in the process is again determined by the plant type.  
Box 10.1 outlines the key benefits and limitations associated with the adoption of tissue 
culture.
1. Examples of international suppliers include: Phytotechnology Laboratories (http://www.phytotechlab.com/); 
Carolina Biological Supply Company (www.carolina.com); Sigma Chemicals (http://www.sigma-aldrich.
com/); Life Technologies/Invitrogen (www.invitrogen.com); Kitchen Culture Kits (www.kitchenculturekit.
com). 
314 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
Box 10.1:  Benefits and Limitations to the Adoption of  Tissue Culture
Benefits: Limitations:
• Increased production of planting material • Steep initial investment and limited 
to meet local and regional demand access to easy financing for farmers
• Saves foreign exchange • Small budget allocation
• Reduction in disease introduction through • Limited technical support
importation • Local and regional disease diagnostics 
• Source of additional income and quarantine: diagnostic services 
• Increased potential for discovery and including virus indexing and genetically 
introduction of new varieties modified organism detection (limited 
• Genetic improvement through genetic services provided in Barbados and 
modification technologies, mutation, Trinidad)
somatic hybridisation, identification of • Inter-regional transportation and 
somatic hybrids (beneficial), heat resistant movement of living material policies
varieties • Long decision-making process in some 
• Efficient production of disease-free plants territories 
• Conservation through germplasm • Establishment of germplasm banks
maintenance • Training for handing tissue culture 
• Builds local knowledge material in territories without facilities
• Potential for increased revenue from • Local or regional equipment 
reduced inputs maintenance
• Lack of buy-in from different 
stakeholders
Tissue culture in the CARICOM region 
In St Lucia, within the Tissue Culture Unit, Department of Agriculture, Propagation 
Division, the tissue culture facilities were upgraded.  The lab now produces high quality 
disease-free material for propagation and germplasm conservation. Over 200,000 
tissue-cultured plants are produced annually; however, the facility has the capacity to 
produce 500,000. The main commodities are banana, yam and orchid. In 2013, orchid 
production was self-sustaining in that the revenue generated from the sale of orchids was 
sufficient for equipment and lab maintenance and employee salaries. In St Vincent and the 
Grenadines, tissue culture facilities were upgraded in 2012.  The tissue culture lab actively 
micro-propagates and distributes roots and tubers, and planting material both locally and 
| 315
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
regionally. Cassava, yam, sweet potato and dasheen plantlets (micro-propagated plants) 
have been distributed regionally to members of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean 
States (OECS), Jamaica and Barbados (CARDI Bi-Weekly 2014).
The major challenge faced was in the distribution and acclimation of material, resulting 
in distributed plantlets dying in several of the receiving territories.  The limited number of 
adequately trained personnel to manage the acclimation of the plantlets is one area that 
therefore needs to be addressed.  
Protected agriculture: greenhouse models
Protected agriculture has been reintroduced into the Caribbean region with the 
construction and commissioning of several tropical greenhouses to increase year-round 
local production and reduce imports (Table 10.3).  In 2012, the largest fully temperature-
controlled greenhouse in the region was constructed in St Kitts with ICDF, Taiwan. 
Selected greenhouse results
In 2010, the Agricultural Resource Management (ARM) Project, funded by the Sugar 
Industry Diversification Foundation (SIDF), embarked on a project to fund the re-
introduction of greenhouse farming to St Kitts and Nevis.  The initial project included the 
construction of ten dams and four demonstration greenhouses with drip irrigation and water 
storage systems. By 2014, eight greenhouses in St Kitts and two in Nevis were completed. 
Farmers were provided with the infrastructure, supplies and training to operationalize the 
systems.  The objective was that farmers will adopt the technology and take full responsibility 
for the greenhouses at the end of the project.  Greenhouse cultivars (hybrid seeds) of tomato, 
sweet pepper, lettuce and cucumber were imported for planting in the greenhouses.  The 
structures were outfitted with fertigation systems (irrigation and fertiliser mixer) and timers. 
In the initial phase, because in-soil planting was used, rows were prepared and covered 
with plastic mulch and drip lines (micro-irrigation) for precision watering. 
Table 10.3: Protected agriculture structures in CARICOM territories
Country No. of structures (year)
Dominica 190 (2012)
Jamaica 261 (2013)
St Lucia 246 (2010)
Trinidad and Tobago 50 (2012)
St Kitts and Nevis 10 (2013)
Grenada 18 (2010)
St Vincent and the Grenadines 130 (2010)
Source: Adapted from CARDI (2010 and 2012)
316 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
In Haiti, as part of the WINNER program, a five-year project sponsored by the United 
States Agency for International Development (USAID), and implemented by the development 
contractor Chemonics, as many as 1,000 greenhouses were constructed during 2012–13 
period.  The programme is not without controversies related to the distribution of Monsanto 
seeds treated with potentially toxic pesticides and herbicides (Innocent 2011; ‘Monsanto 
in Haiti’ 2011), inconsistent delivery of promised storage supplies (Lentfer 2013), alleged 
by-passing of the Haitian Ministry of Agriculture (Center for Economic Policy and Research 
2011) and an overall approach that threatens to displace long-standing peasant association 
networks with US-style agribusiness (Yaffe, 2011). WINNER does, however, represent 
an attempt to boost higher-scale commercial production, partly through greenhouse 
protected agriculture, and deliver that produce to local consumers through outlets such as 
the new weekly Mache Peyizan market in Tabarre (‘WINNER’s Farmers’ Market Delivers 
on Expectations’ 2012).
In St. Kitts, sweet pepper and tomato production fluctuated greatly from 2004 to 2012 
(Figure 10.3), however, in 2013, a 25 percent increase in sweet pepper and a similar 20 
percent increase in tomato production were realised (Jackson 2014). Since the increase 
in cash crop production corresponded to the commissioning of the greenhouses, it can be 
concluded that the greenhouse crop cultivation contributed to the increase in production 
of these crops.  
Figure 10.3:  Total sweet pepper and tomato production from 2004 to 2013
| 317
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Protected agriculture: shade house models
Haiti and St. Kitts and Nevis have also seen the implementation of another kind of small-
scale protected agriculture based on shade houses that retain the protective roofing and 
walls of the greenhouse model but forego energy-intensive climate control systems and 
instead allow air to pass through walls. The University of Nouvelle Grand’Anse (UNOGA) 
is a small private university that shares a 8.5 ha campus with the Fondation Nouvelle 
Grand’Anse (FNGA), headquartered in Dekade, along the Grand’Anse river, 9 km southeast 
of Jeremie, the provincial capital. In order to develop new income generating activities, 
and to present farmers with a new and more profitable method of farming, faculty and 
students at UNOGA partnered with technicians from FNGA to install a shade house and 
test the results of protected vegetable production. During this process, tomatoes, carrots, 
chard, cabbage, and hot pepper have been tested under the shade house. The most recent 
harvest data for February–March 2014 indicate that 109 kg of hot pepper (Habanero) were 
collected from 46 plants.
Inside a previously constructed shade house of 200 m2, a drip irrigation system was 
installed, and distribution pipes were connected to water tank of 2,272l capacity.  The water 
tank used gravity to provide water to the test crops, though some electric power was needed 
to pump water from the river to a main concrete water tower connected to the campus pigsty. 
Six in-ground beds were prepared with two drip irrigation lines each. Each bed was seeded 
with one different vegetable — carrot, chard, cabbage, and hot pepper — and tomatoes were 
seeded to two beds, and the test crops irrigated for 4 hours twice a week. 
The testbed system from Dekade (Figure 10.4) was replicated at a more remote site near 
Pic Makaya (Figure 10.5) in southern Grand’Anse with participation of another peasant 
community and support provided by UNOGA faculty and FNGA technicians.  
General benefits and limitations
As part of the experiment, researchers collected qualitative data on how local farmers 
perceived the non-traditional system.  Most farmers can be described as small-scale and 
vulnerable with farms between 0.5 and 1.5 ha in size, and typically situated on eroded land. 
Farmers noted several general benefits and limitations of shade house protected farming 
when compared with traditional open-air, rain-fed agriculture (Box 10.2).
Participants were also asked to analyse how this system specifically could be adapted 
to the conditions and environment of peasant farmers in rural Haiti.  They produced the 
following list of additional benefits and limitations (Box 10.3).
318 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
Box 10.2: Benefits and Limitations of Shade House, Protected Farming 
Compared to Traditional Open-Air, Rain-Fed Agriculture
Benefits: Limitations:
•	 Optimal plant productivity •	 Higher frequency of maintenance 
•	 Faster maturity (especially cabbage) •	 Reduced pollination (especially with 
•	 Easy control of weeds and insects tomatoes) 
•	 Higher yield per unit area •	 Need for additional pollination support in 
•	 Economic profitability certain types of crop
•	 •	 Non-adaptation of certain crops (e.g. Reduction of direct exposure to sun 
tomato).  It was found that tomatoes in 
•	 Reduction of evaporation 
general may not be adapted to the system, 
•	 Better working conditions for the farm 
the specific variety may not be adapted to 
worker, less physical effort the system (indeterminate growth), and 
•	 Reduction in the area of planting (less land, the system may need more frequent crop 
more results) maintenance
•	 Environmental protection, particularly as in •	 Need for  an automatic  i rr igat ion 
the case of crops that require staking (pre- system, with additional costs for set-up, 
staking was installed). There was no need maintenance and cleaning 
to use wood to support the tomatoes, for •	 Rapid spread of disease and insects in case 
example. of attack
•	 Possibility of continuous production •	 High cost of installing the system
•	 Protection against animal intrusion
Box 10.3: Specific Benefits and Limitations for Rural Haiti
Benefits: Limitations:
•	 Easy to maintain •	 High installation cost means the farmers 
•	 The farmer has more time for other activities, will not undertake such an activity without 
such as livestock additional support 
•	 Better economic returns and opportunity to •	 The issue of identifying appropriate cultivars 
grow more profitable crops than beans and •	 New agricultural practices and training would 
corn  be required for peasants 
| 319
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Hydroponics community farms
In addition to the CFBC hydroponics system, two alternate hydroponic farms were 
established in St Kitts and Nevis.  The Skills Training and Entrepreneurial Program (STEP), 
a joint venture between the Ministry of Agriculture and the Department of Education, 
was launched in 2012 with young males as the major beneficiaries. The program provides 
training in crop production using a vertical hydroponics system as a platform for enterprise 
development.  Crops are grown in vertically stacked pots filled with coconut mesh housed 
in open-sided shade houses with a reflective porous roof.  Vertical drip lines are installed in 
the stacked pots, and fertigation is fully automated (Figures 10.6A and 10.6B).  The program 
has been hailed a success as there is a steady supply of produce sold to local restaurants and 
supermarkets. The major crops produced include tomatoes, lettuce, squash and beets, and 
there is an occasional demand for micro-greens (juvenile plantlets often eaten raw in salads). 
Non-traditional products through agro-processing
Agro-processing of non-traditional products like flour from breadfruit, cassava, and sweet 
potato has become an important component for revenue generation in the Caribbean region. 
Establishments such as the Trinidad and Tobago Agribusiness Association (TTABA), the 
National Agricultural Marketing and Development Corporation (NAMDEVCO) of Trinidad 
and Tobago, and the Agro-processors’ Cooperatives of St. Kitts and Nevis, produce such 
commodities as alternatives to already existing products.  In addition, these products have 
a higher nutritive value than the more refined products gracing the supermarket shelves. 
Successful agro-processing requires adequate facilities for processing and storage.  However, 
a consistent theme throughout the region is the limited access to funding and support for 
acquisition and training for personnel.  This problem was somewhat alleviated in 2014 in St 
Kitts and Nevis, when the storage facilities for value-addition to some crops were upgraded.
Researchers and students at the University of Nouvelle Grand’ Anse (UNOGA), Jeremie, 
Haiti, have been successful in producing breadfruit flour and marketing it as a food tourism 
souvenir product. It has also been introduced on a limited basis in the United States as an 
artisanal grain substitute popular with those who prefer gluten free diets or the so-called 
Paleo-diet. UNOGA researchers have also had experimental success developing a dried fruit 
roll and energy bar by combining fruits and vegetables in a boiling pot then drying out the 
paste and shaping it as needed.
320 |
CLARENCE FITZROY BRYANT COLLEGE (CFBC) MODEL: 
HYDROPONICS, ORGANOPONICS, AND HYBRIDPONICS
Within the broader context of non-traditional agriculture adaptations reviewed above, 
researchers, students, government agencies, NGOs, businesses and community-based 
stakeholders have partnered to develop a new system that combines several techniques. 
This approach blends shade house protected agriculture with a combination of hydroponics, 
organoponics, and hybridponics growing systems.  The sections that follow provide more 
detail on the different systems with emphasis on key aspects of hydroponic growing (effective 
plant combination, choice of growing medium, and managing nutrient solutions), data on 
plant productivity, and a commercialization model.  
Hydroponics definition, system design and benefits
What is Hydroponics?
Hydroponics can be defined as a technique used to grow plants without soil, in a system 
containing the following elements: the root zone, the aerial organs of the plant, an irrigation 
system to supply nutrient solution to the root zone, and a drainage system for dealing 
with runoff (Schröeder and Leith 2002).  In the CFBC adaptation model in St Kitts, these 
components were adapted to include the use of an electric pump to continuously circulate 
nutrient solution over the root system of plants located in a growth medium and protected 
by a shade house enclosure. 
CFBC model system design
Researchers and students began by creating three small systems on the main campus—
one traditional, one organoponics, and one hydroponics—to compare various aspects of 
plant growth across systems. A series of six field observations of these on-campus growing 
systems were conducted to collect and compare a wide spectrum of data related to plant 
productivity. While the full results are available in a longer paper (Thomas 2010), the actual 
field reports (in their unedited form) from visits numbered 1, 5 and 6, are presented on the 
following pages.
| 321
     Figure 10.7A: Organoponics lettuce         Figure 10.7B: Hydroponics lettuce  
                         germination
Organoponics plants Hydroponics plants
Lettuce
        Figure 10.7C: Organoponics basil            Figure 10. 7D:  Hydroponics basil   
            germination
Organoponics plants Hydroponics plants
Basil
Figure 10.7E: Parsley
Parsley
322 |
Figure 10.8A: Lettuce organoponics             Figure 10.8B: Lettuce hydroponics
Organoponics Hydroponics
Lettuce
         Figure 10.8C: Basil organoponics              Figure 10.8D: Basil hydroponics 
Organoponics Hydroponics
Basil
| 323
Figure 10.9A:  Lettuce organoponics     
Organoponics
Lettuce
         Figure 10.9b: Basil organoponics
Organoponics
Basil
324 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
| 325
Visit/Entry Number:  1             
Date (Organoponics): 4th February, 2010                    
Date (Hydroponics): 29th March, 2010
 
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Hydroponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil Lettuce Basil
Physical
To measure the The height 4.3 cm 4.8 cm 0.4 cm 1.5 cm At this visit, the plants within the organoponics system 
height of plant of the were transplanted at three weeks old. These were 
plants was grown in vitro before they were transplanted.  Figures 
measured. 10.7A and 10.7B show the size of the plants at the 
To measure the The width 9.0 cm 7.2 cm 2.5 cm 2.0 cm point of transplantation.  The first measurements were 
width  of plant of the recorded a week afterwards when they were four weeks 
plants was old. By means of comparison to week three, there 
measured was vigorous growth of the plants in all aspects of the 
To measure The length of 5.4 cm 3.4 cm 2.4 cm 0.9 cm plants shown in this system. The colours of the stems 
the length of the longest and the leaves of the two plants were ideal based on 
longest leaf leaf was the proposed/standard look of the ideal as indicated 
measured previously. The measurements for the hydroponics 
To measure The width of 2.5 cm 2.2 cm 1.3 cm 0.7 cm plants however were recorded from the first week 
the width of the broadest of growth. There was growth. The colours of the two 
broadest leaf leaf was plants matched those which were proposed in the same 
measured. section as above.
To observe the The colour of Green Purple- Green Purple-
colour of the the stem was reddish Reddish
stem observed.
To observe the The colour Green Dark Green Dark 
colour of the of the Green Green
leaves leaves was 
observed.
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
326 |
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Hydroponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil Lettuce Basil
Biological
Pests: The plants No pests were No pests were There were no pests found in neither system. When 
To examine the were found on the found on the plants begin to germinate, they have large stores of 
types of pests examined for plants. plants. sucrose in their roots for proper root growth. Without 
present the presence efficient growth of the roots, plants’ development 
of pests. will be restricted, growth will be stunted and 
photosynthesis will be prohibited. There are no large 
To determine The impacts There were no There were no food stores in the stems of these plants at these stages. 
the extent to that pests impacts caused impacts induced Hence, pests will not gain adequate food and thus they 
which the pests had on the by pests. by pests. avoid these crops and seek others. Moreover, some 
impact the plants were diseases such as mosaic are caused by other organisms. 
plants recorded. There were no adverse effects of pests or diseases on 
the plants.
Diseases:
To examine The plants There were no There were no 
the types were diseases that diseases that 
of diseases examined for were examined were examined 
present the presence on the plants. on the plants.
of diseases.
To determine The impacts There were no There were no 
the extent to that diseases implications implications 
which these had on the since no diseases since no diseases 
diseases impact plants were were recognized. were found.
the plants recorded.
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
| 327
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Hydroponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil Lettuce Basil
Environmental
To record any Any Parsleys and Parsleys and Parsley and thymes were cultivated in the same 
pest control biological thymes were thymes were medium near the plants that were observed. This was 
mechanisms control the pest control the pest control essential because as these ‘two pests detractors’ grew, 
mechanism mechanisms in mechanisms in they produced high levels of alkaloid and toxins within 
that was this system. this system. their leaves.
imposed was 
documented. Figure 10.7E shows how parsley leaves appear. They are 
To record The type of The drip The reservoir of so green because they are uninfested by pests and are 
the type of irrigation irrigation system the hydroponics disease resistant due to their large stores of alkaloid 
Irrigation system used was used. Five system and toxins. 
System used was noted gallons were contained 
and the water used for this water that was In the event that any pest consume or taste-even this 
quantity visit. continuously plant, they will be repulsed as it will taste bitter. This 
used was recycled. Only was strategically done because the taste is not enticing 
recorded. 25 gallons of for pests and so, thymes and parsleys are undesirable 
water was used for them. Since pests are the main sources of diseases, 
in the reservoir the plants are said to be disease-resistant also as they 
even though have dual effects in warding off pests and diseases 
its maximum simultaneously. Furthermore, five gallons of water was 
capacity is 40 used for the organoponics system initially as plants did 
gallons. not require as much like in the latter stages at these 
early points of growth and development. Although the 
hydroponics system’s reservoir maximum capacity was 
40 gallons (as mentioned before) only 25 gallons was 
used as the number of baskets/cups used was reduced 
considerably by 30. 
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
328 |
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Hydroponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil Lettuce Basil
Nutrients
Fertilizers: Any addition No Nitrate was No Nitrates There was no urgency to add any nutrients to the 
To assess the of Nitrate to added to the soil. were added in systems at this first visit. However, prior to these 
addition of any the plants’ solution. visits, manure and bagasse ash were added to the soil 
Nitrogen (N) root medium in the Organoponics system. They contained NPK. 
to the plants was noted. There was no addition of the three nutrient solutions. 
medium Furthermore, the pH value of the Organoponics system 
To assess the Any No Phosphorus No Phosphorus was 7.5. According to the Ferry Morse Seed company 
application of application of was applied to was applied to Premium Soil Test Kit Lab Book, this range is not the 
Phosphorus (P) Phosphorus this medium. this medium. most suitable for neither plant’s growth at optimal 
to the plants to the levels (pH requirements noted before). Nevertheless, 
medium plants’ root after four weeks, the plants still showed signs of growth 
medium was and development. On the other hand, the solution for 
recorded. the Hydroponics at the first field visit appeared to be 
To assess the Any There was no There was no favourable for the lettuces being 7, but inappropriate 
supplement of supplement supplementation supplementation for the basil plants. Although the pH value seemed 
Potassium (K) of Potash of Potash to the of Potash to the to be inadequate, the basil crops still grew in the 
to the plants’ to the soil. solution. conditions that were presented to them.
medium plants’ root 
medium was 
documented.
To measure The pH value 7.5 7
the Potenz of the plants’ 
Hydrogen (pH) medium was 
of the plants noted.
medium
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
| 329
Visit/Entry Number:   5
Date (Organoponics): 4th March, 2010                    
Date (Hydroponics): 23rd April, 2010
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Hydroponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil Lettuce Basil
Physical
To measure The height of 11.8 cm 29.3 cm 15.7 cm 40.3 cm By this visit, the plants continued to 
the height of the plants was show great improvements in terms 
plant measured. of growth and development. The 
To measure The width of 37.0 cm 28.0 cm 27.8 cm 30.6 cm organoponics lettuces grew by 16 
the width  of the plants was percent while the basils grew by 25 
plant measured. percent for this visit. Meanwhile in the 
To measure The length of 19.0 cm 9.1 cm 19.4 cm 9.2 cm hydroponics system, the lettuces grew 
the length of the longest by 8 percent whereas the basils grew by 
longest leaf leaf was 33 percent. As the hydroponics system 
measured. continued to express dominance, 
To measure The width of 16.8 cm 5.5 cm 21.0 cm 4.6 cm growth is smaller than the weeks before 
the width of the broadest as plants began to reach their maximal 
broadest leaf leaf was point as they continue to exploit the 
measured. various nutrients. The colours of all the 
To observe the The colour of Dark Green Purplish- Dark Purplish- plants were ideal.
colour of the the stem was Reddish Green Reddish
stem observed
To observe the The colour of Dark Green Green Dark Dark 
colour of the the leaves was Green Green
leaves observed.
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
330 |
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Hydroponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil Lettuce Basil
Biological
Pests The plants There were Leaf miners No pests were The only plants that seemed to be 
To examine were no pests and cater- found in this affected by pests and diseases were 
the types of examined for found. pillars found. system at this visit. the organoponics basil. Caterpillars and 
pests present the presence leaf miners still affected these plants 
of pests. as there was an abundance of food 
To determine The impacts There were There were There were no sources present. Aphids are known to 
the extent that the pests no impacts whitish- impacts induced by feed on plants once their food sources 
to which the had on the induced by yellowish pests. are sufficient. These were expected to 
pests impact plants were pests. caused trails be seen, but were not. It is possible that 
the plants recorded. in the leaves the time of visit was a factor and the 
caused by leaf inspection of the plants was insufficient.
miners.
Diseases
To examine The plants There were There were no There were no 
the types were no diseases diseases seen. diseases seen. 
of diseases examined for seen.
present the presence 
of diseases.
To determine The impacts No There were no There were no 
the extent to that the pimplications implications implications since 
which these diseases since no since no no diseases were 
diseases had on the diseases were diseases found. found.
impact the plants were found.
plants recorded.
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
| 331
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Hydroponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil Lettuce Basil
Environmental
To record any Any biological Parsley and thyme were used Parsleys and The same biological pests control 
pest control control to deter pests. thymes were used mechanisms were employed as in visit 
mechanisms mechanism to deter pests. one. This was so because the reasons 
that was for the usages of these pest-resistant 
imposed was plants remained constant as they 
documented. manufactured more and more alkaloids 
To record The type of The drip irrigation system was The reservoir of and toxins as they grew. In this way, the 
the type of irrigation used. Eighteen gallons were the hydroponics leaves kept detracting pests while they 
irrigation system used used for this visit. system contained grow.  Since pests are the vectors that 
system used was noted water that was transmit diseases, then the repelling of 
and the water continuously these pests prevented diseases also.
quantity used recycled. The 
was recorded. same 25 gallons 
of water was used 
in this reservoir 
even though its 
maximum capacity 
is 40 gallons.
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
332 |
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Hydroponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil Lettuce Basil
Nutrients/Fertilizers
To assess the Any addition No Nitrate was added to the There was no addition of nutrients in 
addition of any of Nitrate to system. the organoponics system despite the 
Nitrogen (N) the plants’ No Nitrate was pH values and nutrient concentrations 
to the plants root medium added to the that existed therein. Nutrient solutions 
medium was noted. system. that contained NPK were added to the 
To assess the Any No Phosphorus was added to No Phosphorus reservoir in the hydroponics system the 
application of application of the system. was added to the previous week. This was expected to 
Phosphorus (P) Phosphorus system. sustain the system for the time being. 
to the plants to the plants’ Hence, none of the solutions were used 
medium root medium here.
was recorded.
To assess the Any No Potassium was added to No Potassium 
supplement of supplement of the system. was added to the 
Potassium (K) Potash to the system. 
to the plants’ plants’ root 
medium medium was 
documented. 
To measure The pH value 7.5 7
the Potenz of the plants’ 
Hydrogen (pH) root medium 
of the plants was tested 
medium and noted.
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
| 333
Visit/Entry Number:   6
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil
Physical
To measure the The height of the 15.3 cm 30.5 cm There was a ten percent growth of 
height of plant plants was measured. the lettuce and a four percent growth 
of the basil. Plants started to slow 
in growth as the ‘plateau’ effect was 
To measure the The width of the plants 41.2 cm 40.7 cm taking place in which growth was 
width  of plant was measured. minimal. This may the due to the 
To measure the The length of the 19.6 cm 9.3 cm deficiencies in nutrients as plants 
length of longest longest leaf was would have already utilized large 
leaf measured. quantities to get to these stages. It 
To measure the The width of the 19.5 cm 5.7 cm was also possible that they neared the 
width of broadest broadest leaf was point of maximal growth. The leaves 
leaf measured. and stem colours were ideal.
To observe the The colour of the stem Green Reddish
colour of the stem was observed
To observe the The colour of the leaves Green Green
colour of the leaves was observed. 
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
334 |
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil
Biological
Pests: The plants were No pests were Leaf miners The lettuce at this stage seemed to 
To examine the examined for the found in this be unaffected. However, the aphids 
types of pests presence of pests. system at this are likely to be in effect still because 
present visit. there are large stores of sucrose in 
To determine the the plants stems at this time. It is also 
extent to which the The impacts that the There were no There were possible that other organisms still 
pests impact the pests had on the plants effects induced by whitish-yellowish invaded the system, but were not 
plants were recorded. pests since they caused trails in the spotted upon the visit as this could 
were absent. leaves caused by have been a factor that influenced the 
leaf miners. results. Nonetheless, the diminishing 
Diseases: The plants were There were no There were no of symptoms of diseases showed the 
To examine the examined for the diseases that were diseases that were plants recuperated. It can be that these 
types of diseases presence of diseases. examined examined. deficiencies only occurred at the point 
present in time because they were inaccessible 
To determine the The impacts that the There were no There were no to the plants at those specific times. 
extent to which diseases had on the implications since implications since The leaves, like in week four and five 
these diseases plants were recorded. no diseases were no diseases were would have been bombarded by flies 
impact the plants found. found. and thus causing leaf miners. 
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
| 335
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil
Environmental
To record any Any biological control Parsleys and Parsleys and The same biological pests control 
pest control mechanism that thymes were used thymes were used mechanisms were employed as in 
mechanisms was imposed was to resist pests. to resist pests. visit one. This was so because the 
documented. reasons for the usages of these pest-
To record the type The type of irrigation The drip irrigation The reservoir of resistant plants remained constant as 
of irrigation system system used was noted system was used. the hydroponics they manufactured more and more 
used and the water quantity Twenty gallons system contained alkaloids and toxins as they grew. In 
used was recorded. were used for this water that was this way, the leaves kept detracting 
visit. continuously pests while they grow.  Since pests 
recycled. The are the vectors that transmit diseases, 
same 25 gallons then the repelling of these pests 
of water was used prevented diseases also.
in this reservoir 
even though its 
maximum capacity 
is 40 gallons.
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
336 |
Observations
Objectives Activities Organoponics Interpretative Comments
Lettuce Basil
Nutrients Any addition of Nitrate No Nitrate was No Nitrate was There was no addition of nutrients in 
Fertilizers to the plants’ root added to the added to the the organoponics system despite the 
To assess the medium was noted. system. system. pH values and nutrient concentrations 
addition of any that existed therein. Nutrient solutions 
Nitrogen (N) to the that contained NPK were added to the 
plants medium reservoir in the hydroponics system 
two previous weeks. This was expected 
To assess the Any application of No Phosphorus No Phosphorus 
to sustain the system for the time 
application of Phosphorus to the was added to the was added to the 
being. Hence, none of the solutions 
Phosphorus (P) to plants’ root medium system. system.
were used here.
the plants medium was recorded. 
To assess the Any supplement of No Potassium No Potassium 
supplement of Potash to the plants’ was added to the was added to the 
Potassium (K) to root medium was system. system. 
the plants’ medium documented. 
To measure the The pH value of the 7.5 7
Potenz Hydrogen plants’ root medium 
(pH) of the plants was tested and noted.
medium
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
Additional data from the initial phase of experiments are presented in the section on 
plant productivity later on, and indicate significantly enhanced productivity moving from 
traditional to organoponics to hydroponics. Having achieved the desired results, the research 
team re-designed the hydroponic system on a much larger scale. A semi-commercial 
hydroponic system was designed and built at the CFBC. It has an individual plant capacity 
of 300 plants but can accommodate as many as 1,200 plants, depending on the crop choice. 
Instead of adopting the typical system designs that already existed, the technology was 
adapted and simplified to reach the intended target population; low resource persons.  In 
one adaptation, the CFBC system to utilized water straight from the municipal source, 
meaning no reverse osmosis system was needed to purify the water before nutrients are 
added and mixed.
Researchers also managed to reduce the electrical components to just one commercial 
pump that can deliver 4, 921 l in circulation every hour at 167 watts. The question of algae 
growth as well as suitable O2 levels for root development was satisfied with a high pressure 
piping system that was accomplished by simply reducing the pipe size 3.8 cm from the 
reservoir to the growth chambers at 0.95 cm. Chambers were designed to accommodate 
large rooting systems and withstand high water pressures by using 12.7 cm2 x 12.7 cm2 
schedule 40 PVC. All seeds were sown directly into the hydroponics system in a growth 
media called clay pellets that are placed in a netted plastic cup 7.6 cm deep x 7.6 cm wide. 
These pellets have been used for the past six years and still can be used for some more 
years.  The hydroponics system was also designed to be operated by one individual (male or 
female) who would be able to dismantle and relocate in 30 minutes or less when hurricanes 
threaten. During six years of operation, the research team successfully grew 16 crops as an 
adaptive feature, which included cultivars of the following:
Basil Corn Lettuce Soya bean
Bell peppers Cucumber Okra Strawberries
Broccoli Eggplant Sage String bean
Cabbage Jalapeno peppers Season peppers Tomato
| 337
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
General benefits
CFCB College researchers noted the following benefits of using hydroponic techniques 
to grow plants
• Production can be year round (i.e. not seasonal) 
• No leaching of nutrients to the environment
• No use of pesticides
• No weeds 
• High nutritional values 
• Maximum production in confined areas 
• Efficient use of water 
• Less labour intensive 
• Can be carried out in any local location 
• Sustainable
• Promotes gender equity
Experiment 1: Water Usage Comparison At The CFBC Plant 
Research Facility  
In order to compare the efficiency of the three CFBC model plant growing systems 
(hydroponics, organoponics, and traditional), several experiments were conducted, two 
of which are presented below.  The 1st experiment compares water usage among the three 
systems, and the 2nd experiment examines shade effects on plant growth and development 
in the hydroponics system.
This experiment sought to determine the quantity of water needed to bring lettuce to full 
maturity under the various systems, namely hydroponics, organoponics and traditional 
systems.  The hypothesis was also tested that plants in hydroponics systems will utilize less 
water than other soil based systems from planting to harvest.  The methodology employed 
was as follows:                                                                                        
• All lettuce seeds were germinated in rockwool media to ensure appropriate 
requirements and eliminate bias across seedling test group. 
• Soil samples for organoponics and traditional techniques were tested and upgraded 
to ensure that they are within nutrient range of the hydroponics nutrient formulae. 
• The emitter delivery on both organoponics and traditional system were recorded 
(50ml/minute).
338 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
• All three planting systems were located within the same shade house and exposed 
to the same atmospheric conditions.
• The hydroponics system used was a completely water-based circulatory system in 
which water was taken straight from the municipal source and to which a specific 
formulae were added.
• Traditional and organoponics system were fed twice daily (morning and afternoon) 
for 10 minutes. 
• Plants were allowed to mature fully without any interference.
Table 10.4 presents the results of the experiment.
Table 10.4: Water use across three (3) growing systems using lettuce 
(Lactuca sativa)
Parameters Hydroponics Organoponics Traditional
Maturity from seed 25 days 45 days 58 days
Water used 10,730 ml 59,530 ml 78,570 ml 
Shade conditions 30% 30% 30%
Delivery method Circulation 50ml/min for 10 50ml/min for 10 
minutes,  twice daily minutes, twice daily
Water source Municipal Municipal Municipal
Experiment 2:  Shade Effects on Plant Growth and 
Development at CFBC Plant Research Facility  
This experiment sought to determine the effects of excessive shading on plant development, 
as well as test the hypothesis that shade intensity reduces the quality of nutrient uptake 
and quality of the product.  The methodology was as follows: 
• Seedlings were sown directly into the same hydroponics system type designed by 
S. LaPlace -  nutrient flow, ebb and flow, and aeroponics combination
• one system was shaded using 50 percent saran mesh 
• one system was shaded with 30 percent saran mesh
• water source was municipal 
The nutrient formulae used included:
• Primary formula: 
(1.32 ml/L -  2.5 percent ammonium phosphate, 1.0 percent potassium phosphate 
2:1:6 (NPK) – 6.0 percent potassium nitrate, 0.5 percent magnesium nitrate 
| 339
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
• Secondary formula:
(0.88 ml/L - 5.0 percent phosphoric acid, 4.0 percent potassium phosphate
0:5:4 (NPK) - 1.5 percent magnesium phosphate, 1.0 percent potassium sulphate
5.0 percent calcium nitrate
0.1 percent potassium borate, 0.0005 percent cobalt nitrate, 0.01 percent copper
• Trace formula:
(0.99 ml/L - EDTA, 0.1 percent iron EDTA, 0.05 percent manganese EDTA,
5:0:4 (NPK) - 0.0008 percent ammonium molybdate, 0.015 percent zinc EDTA
The results of this experiment are presented in Table 10.5.
Table 10.5: Results for lettuce (Lactuca sativa) with 30 percent shade vs. 
50 percent shade
Parameters 30% shade 50% shade
Water used 13.4 l 8.26 l 
Taste palatable bitter
Leaf quality durable brittle
Comparative weight heavier lighter
Leaf colour lighter darker
CHOOSING PLANT COMBINATIONS AND GROWING MEDIA FOR 
HYDROPONIC CULTIVATION
Planting scenario 
When planting more than one crop in a hydroponics system, the dynamics concerning 
water and nutrient use can become very challenging.  For example, if peppers and tomatoes 
are planted together in the same system, researchers found that peppers must be planted 
first. The rationale behind this is that tomatoes are considered vines and their growth rate 
compared to a pepper plant is much faster. The root system on a vine is better adapted for 
rapid growth and therefore the nutrient uptake is proportionally rapid. In a system where 
both plants are competing for the same nutrients, the more adapted and sensitized root 
system will be more efficient in accessing these available nutrients. Therefore a tomato 
would outgrow a pepper, causing the pepper to show signs of deficiency while the tomato 
is thriving.  
In terms of a strategy, the peppers should be planted before the tomatoes, allowed to 
establish themselves in the system for about two weeks, and then the tomatoes can be 
planted. This would ensure that the pepper plant will be able to access the nutrients as 
340 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
well as the tomato during growth and development. If the number of crop types grown 
simultaneously is to be increased, then a clear understanding of the nutrient requirements for 
each plant must be understood and carefully worked out, probably through experimentation. 
The first step should involve examining each crop individually, and having an appreciation of 
their growing patterns before combining them with other crops. Crops that are in the same 
family often have similar growth patterns and nutrient requirements, so that for example, 
if tomatoes are being cultivated, then it would also be possible to grow eggplant, cucumber 
and melons.  In like manner, lettuce can be combined with cabbage, broccoli and cauliflower. 
Pollination requirements are also factors that should be kept in mind when considering 
growing plants hydroponically, particularly when a secure location is used that restricts 
the entry of organisms beyond a certain size. If wind is allowed to penetrate the growing 
facility then wind pollination can occur.  With crops like strawberries it is often necessary 
to release a bee inside the shade house to assist; one bee can pollinate over 600 flowers in 
a day. Where pollinators do not have access, and flowers are bisexual, it is also possible to 
hand pollinate the flowers by using a ‘spin toothbrush’to massage the flowers and increase 
the likelihood of successful pollination.  
Growing medium 
Plants in a hydroponic system are typically placed in an inert medium to stabilize them as 
circulating nutrient solution passes through the root network.  Choosing a growing medium 
is dictated by the type of crops to be cultivated, and the growth period.  Key determining 
factors include the potential environmental impact of a particular medium, as well as, 
productivity and time to harvest for a particular crop.  Short-term crops like strings beans, 
lettuce and cucumbers have root systems that establish quickly.  Lettuce for instance is 
better suited for rockwool as a medium because it only takes about 23–25 days to grow and 
harvest, and will need to be quickly and easily removed and replaced to keep the rotation 
from harvest to replant consistent. Other crops like cucumbers and beans have a three to 
four month growing cycle that requires a stronger anchoring medium.  In that case, CFBC 
researchers found hydroton pellets to be most appropriate, though gravel, perlite and peat 
also have good anchoring properties.  
The goal with growing media is to choose one that supports as many project objectives 
as possible, namely those related to the environment (biodegradable and recyclable), 
time, quality and efficiency. Growth media should not be chosen based on price or ease of 
supply but rather on the basis of what is safest for plants to grow in and what has a minimal 
environmental impact when the medium is discarded.        
| 341
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Short-term crops 
Crops that will only last a few weeks in the system are considered short term, and with 
such crops it is advisable to use a medium that can be removed from the hydroponic system 
quite easily without affecting the overall functioning of the system. For crops like lettuce, 
cabbage, broccoli for example, coconut chips or rockwool cubes are best suited.  These 
media are biodegradable, which ensures that the environment remains safe when they 
are eventually discarded.  Also, a fresh seedling can be placed directly into the harvested 
slot simultaneously to maintain a scheduled harvesting cycle. Media like gravel, hydroton 
pellets, perlite and peat are not advisable for short-term crops simply because the frequency 
of recycling is too short, and the process can become very labour intensive.                                                   
Long-term crops 
Crops that will remain in a hydroponics system for 3–12 months, require a medium that 
can stand up to environmental elements, is recyclable, does not breakdown easily (which 
would affect the electro-conductivity (EC) readings), and allows a good gas exchange with 
the immediate environment. A medium that satisfies these characteristics is hydroton clay 
pellets, which have been tested and retested for more than six years of experiments at the 
CFBC.  A variety of crops have been grown in the same hydroponics system and the initial 
pellets are still being used today.  This medium also allows for the sowing of seeds like corn, 
peas, beans, cucumber, and peppers directly into the medium as is done in soil.  After the 
crops are harvested, the cup of clay pebbles are simply taken out, and the old roots removed 
from between the pebbles, which are washed with a detergent, rinsed and replaced in the 
same cup which is returned to the system. 
Managing the nutrient solution
Nutrient use and efficiency 
Knowing how to mix minerals properly and adjust nutrient solution mixes is critical to 
successful hydroponic growing (LaPlace 2014).  The nutrient solution to be used depends 
for example, on various indicators such as different planting scenarios and signs of nutrient 
deficiencies in plants to name a few.  Although all plants of the same species respond similarly 
to nutrient stress, plants of similar species will often show significant differences in their 
nutrient use and efficiency. These result from differences in growth rate, root distribution, 
phase of development, and efficiency of nutrient uptake and utilization (as previously 
mentioned in the case of tomatoes and peppers growing together).  In any given location, 
plants from one species may become nutrient-deficient, while those from another species, 
growing in the same environment right next to them, may not show any deficiency symptoms. 
342 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
Growth rate also affects nutrient status. When the nutrient supply is low or barely adequate 
for growth under existing environmental conditions, many plants lower their growth rate to 
a level which can be supported by the available nutrient supply without displaying typical 
visual deficiency symptoms.
Plant competition and induced deficiencies 
When observed symptoms are the direct result of a nutrient deficiency, the required 
corrective actions are relatively simple. However, symptoms are often the result of 
interactions with other plant species in the same hydroponic system.  Cohabiting plants may 
limit the availability of the nutrients to plants with a lesser-developed root system, leading 
to the expression of deficiency symptoms. For instance, as discussed above, if tomatoes and 
bell peppers are planted at the same time in a hydroponic system, the tomatoes will outgrow 
the bell peppers. This happens simply because the vine crops grow much more rapidly and 
therefore their nutrient uptake will also be more vigorous.  Transition metals such as copper 
(Cu), zinc (Zn) and nickel (Ni) compete with iron (Fe) and each other for plant uptake. 
Competition for uptake is not specific to Fe but holds true for all mineral nutrients that are 
chemically similar and have similar uptake mechanisms. For example, if the availability 
of Cu or Zn is relatively less than that of (Fe), then excessive concentrations of some other 
metal such as Ni will induce a deficiency of one of these nutrients rather than Fe. In the case 
of the macronutrients, excessive amounts of magnesium (Mg) will compete with potassium 
(K) for uptake and can possibly induce a K deficiency. High Mg concentration can also 
induce a calcium (Ca) deficiency. Thus, nutrient deficiencies can be induced by a number of 
different mechanisms that together compound the limited availability of a given nutrient.
Nutrient environment 
The chemical make-up of the nutrient solutions is one of the most critical aspects of 
hydroponics production. Different plant combinations determine the mixture of nutrients 
and the ways in which plants both access and utilize the nutrients in solution.  Plants remove 
substantial amounts of nutrients from the hydroponic solution during their normal growth 
cycle and many long-term environmental changes occur as a result of this process. The 
charge balance of the nutrient solution is maintained through the release of H+ and/or 
OH- ions. These H+ and OH- ions are released from the cations and anions contained in the 
nutrients absorbed by plants. For instance, when plants are fertilized with ammonia, they 
acquire most of their nitrogen in the form of the ammonium cation, rather than from the 
usual nitrate anion. Because nitrate is the main and only anion used by the plant in large 
amounts, the net result of this change is that during normal nutrient uptake the proton 
(H+) excretion will far exceed that of hydroxyl ions (OH-). 
| 343
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
In the case of vigorously growing plants, the amount of excreted protons can be sufficiently 
large, so that a decrease in the pH results, making the nutrient solution more acidic.  The 
immediate effect on the nutrient solution may be favourable for some plants, especially 
acid-loving plants, making iron (Fe2+) more available, however, in the long run, lowering 
the nutrient solution pH can be deleterious to plants in that the availability of nutrients 
will change. A lower pH allows micronutrients to become locked out of solution, eventually 
resulting in deficiencies of nutrients such as Cu and Zn. Additionally, when the pH of the 
solution falls below 5, the solubility of manganese (Mn2+) can increase to such an extent 
as to become toxic to most plant growth.
Organoponics
The second non-traditional technique examined in the CFBC model is organoponics. 
This section of the chapter defines the technique and describes the system design utilized 
by CFCB College researchers.
Defining organoponics
Vandermeer (2004) describes organoponics as ‘a system of urban organic gardens which 
often consists of low-level concrete walls filled with organic matter and soil, with lines of 
drip irrigation laid on the surface of the growing media. Organoponics provide access to 
job opportunities, a fresh food supply to the community, neighbourhood improvement 
and beautification of urban areas.’  In Cuba where the system originated, organoponics 
was developed as a community response to lack of food security.  Although it began as a 
system of organic gardening, it can be modified to introduce chemical fertilizers to maintain 
optimum nutrients for plant growth, but compost, animal manure and other organic 
matter are recommended to keep down input costs.  Use is also made of long cement 
planting troughs and raised metal containers that are filled with composted sugar waste. 
In experimentation and public outreach events conducted by CFBC, researchers found 
that any available containers (new or used) may be utilized, including buckets, barrels, 
and large water bottles.  
Organoponics system design
At the CFBC, lettuce, tomatoes, basil, parsley, and seasoning peppers were grown 
intensively under this organic farming method, with the use of soil from abandoned 
sugarcane fields that were determined to be fertile based on simple field tests of soil (texture, 
moisture, structure, and presence of microbes).  Planting trays were constructed from used 
marine plywood lined with construction plastic to prevent rapid decay of the plywood.  The 
344 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
planting trays were filled with 1.3 cm gravel to a depth of 7.6 cm, and then overlaid with 
sand to a depth of about 5.1 cm to facilitate drainage (Figure 10.27).
  The planting trays were filled with soil to a depth of about 20.3 cm.  Drip irrigation lines 
were installed about 30.5 cm apart in parallel lines where plants were to be cultivated.  
Based on the findings at the CFBC, it is recommended that trays should be constructed 
with light concrete panels with vertical sides and a V-shape at the bottom to accommodate 
a range of plants with varying root lengths.  This design will also optimize drainage and 
lengthen the life-span of the trays.  The growing systems were housed in a shade house in 
which the walls and roofing were comprised of 30 percent shadecloth/shademesh.  It is also 
recommended that the roof is covered with polyliner or plastic to prevent the direct impact 
of rainfall, but with water catchment that can be used for irrigation.  With the containerised 
planting trays, shadehouse, and drip irrigation, the water requirement can be controlled 
to minimize the use of water. When organoponic and traditional cultivation of plants were 
compared, the organoponic did better than the traditional. The time to harvest was about 
30 percent faster for active plant growth and fruiting; harvests were more productive in a 
shorter time-span, and stems, leaves, and fruits were also about 15 percent larger in size. 
Plant growth and fruiting in the hydroponic system occurred 17.5 percent faster, resulting 
in a reduction in the time to harvest by approximately 50 percent , when compared to 
traditional cultivation. 
“Hybridponics”
This term, hybridponics, was coined to describe a system in which a seedling is removed 
from a hydroponic system and transplanted in an organoponics system to complete the 
growth process.  Where plants were transplanted, they displayed significantly-enhanced 
growth and development compared to similar plants grown exclusively in organoponics. 
The dynamics of soil chemistry and physics limit seedlings access of nutrients, due to the 
relative immobility of nutrients in the soil matrix (Resh 2013). Plants generally would not 
be able to access certain nutrients based on their inferior root development.  When plants 
of the same age and species were taken from hydroponics and transplanted to containerized 
soil they developed much faster because of the advanced rooting system during their 
hydroponic germination. These seedlings were able to access nutrients that would have 
been otherwise unavailable to them if they had grown strictly in soil.  Hydroponics, then, 
can be used to promote a healthy start and robust seedling development for plants that will 
ultimately grow in a range of soil-based systems.
| 345
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Figure 10.29: Sketch of lightweight concrete planting trays
In both organoponics and hybridponics growing systems, plants are grown intensively 
for optimum utilization of space.  Intensive cultivation also provides for symbiosis in 
which the diversity of plants can benefit from each other with respect to varying light/
shade requirements, nutrient requirements and uptake from various depths, and biological 
pest control mechanisms through which plants attract and/or repel various insects, both 
beneficial and harmful.  Pest control can be enhanced by painting fence posts in various 
colours to attract a wider diversity of insects. While there was less incidence of pest 
infestation in the organoponics growing system than in the traditional system, natural pest 
control substances (e.g. solution from neem mixed with thyme and garlic) were adequate 
to deter white flies and black sooty mould. These occurred to a much lesser extent in this 
system compared to the traditional cultivation. In addition, caterpillars and cutworms were 
found in the traditional but not the organoponics growing systems.  
346 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
Commercialisation
For any agricultural technique to have an impact on local food supply, it has to be 
implemented by growers and embraced by local retail and consumer networks. Along with 
optimizing the CFCB College model system, faculty-student teams from the CFBC and the 
University of Central Florida also used fieldwork marketing research to generate a model 
for commercializing crop outputs and estimating livelihood potential. Data collected on 
plant productivity and a commercial estimate of expected inputs and outputs associated 
with operating a hydroponic system are presented in the next section. The section then 
concludes with a discussion of macro- and micro-economic factors impacting this system 
when it is viewed as a business model.
 Table 10.6: Plant productivity and water usage across three growing 
systems
System Growth cycle Water used (l) Shaded Non-shade
(days)
Traditional 55 42.8 dark green/brittle     lighter/crisp   
Oraganoponics 45 34.4 dark green/brittle     lighter/crisp
Hydroponics 25 9.5 dark green/brittle     lighter/crisp
Note: 50ml/min was the dripper rate for traditional and organoponics. Hydroponics was in 
circulation and lost 9.5 gallons of solution.
Table 10.7: Profitability estimates for hydroponic production of 300 plants 
in the CFBC Plant Hydroponics System *
Crop Average Minimum Plant Shade house Total Total cost Monthly 
weight/ item yield capacity (44.6 m2) yield/ @ market earnings 
pepper per plant for 44.6 yield average annum  price $3.87/ (US $)
(kg) (bi weekly) m2 (2 peppers) (kg) Kg/
biweekly (kg) annum 
(US $)
Sweet 0.14 2 136.08 163.29 4245.62 16,430.57 1,369.21
Bell 
Pepper
Tomato 0.23 2 136.08 272.16 7076.04 27,384.28 2,282.03
Okra 0.05 4 136.08 108.86 2830.42 10,953.71 912.81
*Fixed start-up cost: of US$ 3,681; Annual Recurring fees (for nutrients) of US$400.
| 347
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Productivity data
One set of productivity data was developed in the following way.  Three small systems 
were designed and constructed to determine which growing system was the most suitable. 
Iceberg lettuce was chosen as the crop of choice because of its short growth period. The 
results after three trials are displayed in Table 10.6, while table 10.7 presents the profitability 
estimates for hydroponic production. 
The data presented above suggest that small-scale non-traditional agriculture has serious 
potential as a commercial endeavour that can improve livelihoods.  Realizing that potential 
is a matter of entrepreneurship however, and the system must be operated as a business, 
shaped by macroeconomic and microeconomic forces.  Based on interviews conducted 
among a number of local restaurants and store owners, it is clear that there is a preference 
for locally produced agricultural goods over those that were imported. At certain times 
of the year, because locally grown produce is simply not available, it becomes necessary 
to import produce.  This however leads to a glut situation on the market, when there is 
a surplus of locally grown produce, which can be addressed by greater access to export 
markets. From a microeconomic perspective, the hybridponics system was found to be very 
profitable and easy to maintain.  The start-up cost for a 6.1 m x 6.1 m system is divided into 
two parts: the hydroponics which cost EC$5,400.00 (US$2,000), and the organoponics, 
which cost EC$10,000.00 (US$3,704), totalling EC$15,400.00 (US$5,704).  Although 
this may initially sound like a substantial amount of money, this sum is only paid once for 
start-up. The upkeep/maintenance cost of the system is EC$520.00 (US$193) monthly 
(i.e. EC$200.00 (US$74) for the organoponics system and EC$320.00 (US$119) for the 
hydroponics).  A profit of EC$15,000.00/month  (US$5,556/month) or EC$180,000.00/
annum (US$66,667/annum)) can be expected after the sum of EC$2,000.00 (US$740) is 
subtracted for labour costs.  Another advantage of the system is that a labourer only spends 
maximum of two hours per day working in this system.  To implement such a system, 
much less space is required compared to traditional farming methods.  The yields from this 
system, however, can match those of traditional farms and the quality may even be better. 
The main disadvantage of the organoponics growing system is that it can be more costly 
with respect to initial input cost, compared to traditional growing systems.  However, 
due to advantages associated with greater productivity, organoponics may prove more 
effective than traditional cultivation, with additional consideration of improved reliability 
and consistency of supply to the market and less impact of climate variability and weather 
conditions.  The practice of organoponics can also be potentially more productive, along 
with its suitability for more widespread participation by a wider cross-section of people in 
rural as well as urban areas.  Moreover, organoponics is less dependent on the fertile land 
348 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
and “hard” labour that characterize traditional cultivation.  With such numerous advantages, 
organoponics appears to be a good adaptation strategy to climate change for food security, 
less impact on the environment, and less effect of the environment on food production than 
traditional food production systems.
CONCLUSION 
Serious barriers face any efforts to provide local Caribbean communities with food 
that is consistently healthy, abundant, and affordable.  The research findings presented 
in this chapter has been generated through a process of collaboration among academics, 
government agencies, NGOs, students, businesses, and community based stakeholders. 
Through such collaborations, such barriers can be effectively overcome to achieve impacts 
that improve local food security across the Caribbean. Inadequate baseline information, 
poor financing and poor management of growing environments plague the application 
of non-traditional techniques in the agriculture industry.  Insufficient technical support 
also plays a role in the limited success of these systems in the region.  It is clear that there 
have been many successes.  A major obstacle to adoption of these techniques is farmer 
buy-in and the part-time nature of farming in many territories.  It is also true that farmers 
must see themselves as business persons first and not mere labourers (Barker 2012). 
Therefore, attitudes and perceptions form a key arena to address, and ensure successful 
implementation.  However, the research and productivity-profitability estimates presented 
above suggest that non-traditional agriculture is indeed a viable business option for small-
scale growers in the Caribbean.  
Protected agriculture already appears to be making an impact on local food supply in 
St  Kitts and Nevis, as the improved figures for 2013 tomato and sweet pepper production 
suggest.  Crucial to solidifying these gains locally will be fostering competent technical 
support and other forms of knowledge transfer, such as the ability to set-up and maintain 
non-traditional systems, reliable reporting on crop productivity and profitability, continuing 
development of agro-processing to deliver longer-lasting, value-added agricultural products 
to the local market, solid business planning at all levels of local agriculture, and more.    
The CFBC model reviewed in this chapter works to integrate development on all these 
levels.  But projecting an inclusive, community-based model for local food production 
throughout the region faces other barriers of language, distance, underdevelopment, and 
political will, which have fragmented the Caribbean historically and threaten to impede 
wider implementation of non-traditional agriculture. Fortunately, the Organization of 
American States (OAS) has agreed to support the expansion of this model to four other 
| 349
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Caribbean countries, and at a recent UNESCO meeting on climate change policy in Nevis, 
representatives from four additional island nations expressed interest in partnering with the 
CFBC research team.  The prospect here is to confront barriers of regional fragmentation and 
vulnerability with regional collaborations that transfer knowledge, adapt it to community-
based needs, and improve food security and social resilience at the local level throughout 
the Caribbean.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank the following organizations for support in the completion of this 
chapter: St. Kitts Department of Agriculture, Judith Ann Towle Fund, University of Central 
Florida College of Arts and Humanities Research Incentive and Development Program.
REFERENCES
Barker, D.  2012. Caribbean Agriculture in a Period of Global Change: Vulnerabilities and 
Opportunities. Caribbean Studies 40, no. 2:41–61. 
Barrow, C. 1992.  Family, Land and Development in St Lucia. Barbados: Institute of Social 
and Economic Research, University of the West Indies.
Beckford, G. 1994. Plantation Economy, Land Reform and the Peasantry in a Historical 
Perspective: Jamaica: 1938–1980. In Land Tenure and Development in the Eastern 
Caribbean, ed. F.W. Alleyne.  Bridgetown, Barbados: Carib Research and Publications 
Inc. 
CARDI. 2010. Protected Agriculture in the CARICOM Region: The Current and Future Role 
of CARDI. http://www.cardi.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Protected-Agriculture-
and-Caricom-Region-2010-Dominica-Republic6.pdf.  Accessed March 18, 2014.
———. 2012. Protected Agriculture and its Potential Role in Achieving Food and Nutrition 
Security in the Caribbean Region. http://www.cardi.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/
Protected-Agriculture-and-Food-and-Nurtition-Security-UWI-Food-Security-
Conference-July-20092.pdf.  Accessed March 18, 2014.
———. 2014. CARDI Bi-Weekly 32, no. 1. http://www.cardi.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/
CARDI-Biweekly-Issue-32.pdf.  Accessed March 18, 2014.
Center for Economic and Policy Research. 2011. Sacrificing Food Sovereignty for Food Aid. 
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/relief-and-reconstruction-watch/sacrificing-
food-sovereignty-for-food-aid.  Accessed March 20, 2014.
Codrington, V.B. 1984. Land Utilization and Economic Development: A Case Study of 
Barbados, 1900–1976. Barbados: Institute of Social and Economic Research, University 
of the West Indies.
350 |
Agricultural Diversification and Non-Traditional Systems for Sustainable Food Production
Demas, W.G. 1987. Agricultural Diversification in the Caribbean Community: Some Issues. 
Statement by President of the Caribbean Development Bank at the Seventeenth Annual 
Meeting of the Board of Governors, Grenada.
Food and Agricultural Organization. 2013. FAOSTAT Statistical Yearbook 2013. FAO, Rome, 
Italy.  http://issuu.com/faooftheun/docs/syb2013issuu/288 
Innocent, F. 2011.  The Monsanto’s Seeds.  Haiti Rewired.  http://haitirewired.wired.com/
profiles/blogs/the-monsantos-seeds. Accessed  March 20, 2011.
Jackson, T. 2014. Annual Review 2013. St Kitts and Nevis: Department of Agriculture, St 
Kitts. Unpublished report.
Lentfer, J. 2013.  USAID’s Answer to the Oxfam Article on the WINNER Project. http://
politicsofpoverty.oxfamamerica.org/2013/10/usaids-answer-to-oxfam-on-the-article-
on-the-winner-project-in-haiti/. Accessed March 20, 2014.
Marie, J.M. 1979. Agricultural	Diversification	in	a	Small	Economy:	The	Case	for	Dominica. 
Barbados: ISER, University of the West Indies.
Marshall, D.D. 1998. Caribbean Political Economy at the Crossroads:  NAFTA and Regional 
Developmentalism. Great Britain: Antony Rowe Ltd.
Marshall, W.K. 1991.  Provision Ground and Plantation Labour in Four Windward Islands: 
Competition for Resources during Slavery. Slavery and Abolition 12, no. 1:48–67.
 Masisi, L., V. Nelwamondo and T. Marwala. 2008. The Use of Entropy to Measure Structural 
Diversity. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computational 
Cybernetics (ICCC 2008), Atlanta, GA, USA.  November 27–29, 2008, 41–45. http://
arxiv.org/pdf/0810.3525.pdf. 
Monsanto in Haiti Part 4: What Haiti Grassroots Watch Found. 2011. http://
haitigrassrootswatch.squarespace.com/6mon4eng. Accessed March 20, 2014.
Murashige, T. and Skoog, F. 1962. A Revised Medium for Rapid Growth and Bioassays with 
Tobacco Tissue Cultures. Physiologia Plantarum 15:473–97.
Naraine, L. 2005. Agricultural Diversification in St Kitts: Factors Affecting Policy and 
Implementation.  Basseterre, St Kitts-Nevis: Government of St Kitts-Nevis, Department 
of Statistics.
 National Academy of Sciences. 2013. Abrupt Impacts of Climate Change: Anticipating 
Surprises. Washington, DC:  The National Academic Press.
Resh, H. M. 2013. Hydroponic Food Production: A Definitive Guidebook for the Advanced 
Home Gardener and Commercial Hydroponic Grower. 7th ed. Boca Raton, Florida: 
CRC Press.
The Royal Society. 2014. Climate Change Evidence and Causes: An Overview from The 
Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences. UK: The Royal Society. http://
| 351
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
royalsociety.org/~/media/Royal_Society_Content/policy/projects/climate-evidence-
causes/climate-change-evidence-causes.pdf.
Schröeder, F.G., and J.H. Leith. 2002. Irrigation Control in Hydroponics. In Hydroponic 
Production of Vegetables and Ornamnetals, ed.  D. Savvas and H. Passam, 263–98. 
Athens, Greece: Embryo Publishers.
Saad, Abobkr I.M., and M.E. Ahmed. 2012.  Plant Tissue Culture Media.  In Recent Advances 
in Plant in Vitro Culture, ed. A. Leva and L.M.R. Rinaldi.  INTECH.  http://www.
intechopen.com/download/get/type/pdfs/id/40181.  Accessed March 31, 2014.
Simoes. A.F., D.C. Kligerman, E.L. La Rovere, M.R. Maroun, M. Barata and M. Obermaier. 
2010. Enhancing Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change: The Case of Smallholder Farmers 
in the Brazilian Semi-arid Region.  Environmental Science and Policy 13, no. 8:801–808.
St Kitts Planning Unit. 2005. Statistical Digest 2005. St Kitts-Nevis Government Printery.
Thomas, M. 2010.  A Comparative Study of an Organoponics and a Hydroponics System 
at the Clarence Fitzroy Bryant College. Basseterre, St Kitts: Clarence Fitzroy Bryant 
College Press. 
Trejos, R., and P. Lizardo de las Casas, eds. 1997. Toward the Sustainable Development 
of Agriculture and the Rural Milieu in the Americas. San Jose, Costa Rica: IICA, 24.
Trotz, U. 2007. Climate Change and Tourism in the Caribbean: Threats and Opportunities. 
Caribbean Tourism Organization 9th Annual Conference on Sustainable Tourism 
Development. Grand Cayman, BWI, May 23, 2007. http://www.onecaribbean.org/
content/files/UlricTrotzTourismandClimateChange.pdf.
Vandermeer, J.H. 2004. The Ecology of Agroecosystems. London, United Kingdom: Jones 
and Bartlett Publishers.
Wilson, L.A., and I. Bekele. 1999. Models for Caribbean Agricultural Diversification (CAD). 
In Proceedings of the Workshop on Models for CAD, August 17–18, 1998, The University 
of the West Indies, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Sciences – CEPAT. Trinidad and 
Tobago. 
WINNER’s Farmers’ Market Delivers on Expectations.  2012. http://www.winnerhaiti.
com/index.php/en/videos/success-stories/53-winner-s-farmers-market-delivers-on-
expectations.  Accessed  March 20, 2014.
Yaffe, N. 2011. USAID’s Assault on Haitian Agriculture. http://haitijustice.wordpress.
com/2011/06/21/winner-bad-for-haiti/. Accessed March 20, 2014.
352 |
Agroforestry Systems and 
Practices in the Caribbean 
Ravindra Ramnarine and Denny Dipchansingh
AN INTRODUCTION TO AGROFORESTRY IN THE 
CARIBBEAN
Overview
Agriculture has been an important part of the economy of Caribbean 
countries  from the colonial period when plantation crops such as 
sugar cane, cocoa, and coffee were grown for the European market. 
After emancipation and during indentureship, peasant farming became 
more prominent among freed slaves and ex-indentured labourers. The 
peasant farms were small in size and consisted mainly of a mixture 
of vegetables, root crops and fruit trees. To allow for the increase in 
agricultural production from large-scale plantation crops and small-scale 
peasant farming many of the forests areas were cleared. In recent times, 
increases in land pressure, growing rural populations, deforestation, and 
environmental degradation have resulted in more fragile and marginal 
lands being subjected to intensive agricultural operations. Forests areas 
are increasingly under threat as a result of these pressures, and in many 
Caribbean countries, the designation of protected areas to safeguard the 
remaining forest has further marginalized hillside farmers by restricting 
the practice of shifting cultivation. Consequently, there is an urgent need 
to find sustainable methods of hillside cultivation. Several alternative land-
use systems have been suggested for increasing agricultural production 
in the Caribbean region such as mixed and multiple cropping systems. 
C H A P T E R  ELEVEN
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
In the mid-1970s, a number of ecologically sound and sustainable land-use systems 
integrating agriculture and forestry, were grouped together under the broad designation of 
‘agroforestry’ (Nair 1993). This practice was initially promoted as an alternative to shifting 
cultivation in developing countries where increasing populations have effectively reduced 
the length of the cycle of forest regeneration or fallow. The incorporation of permanent 
tree crops into farming systems also assists small farmers in diversifying their production 
methods. Agroforestry systems also provide a source of food, job and income for many rural 
households. While agriculture is not a major source of income for the Caribbean countries 
(three to seven percent of GDP), it provides employment for about ten to 20 percent of the 
population across its two main sub-sectors - traditional and non-traditional. Countries 
produced many of their agricultural crops for local consumption and also exported some 
of their traditional or specialty crops which were mainly sugar cane, cocoa, and coffee.
Trees also contribute to the productivity and sustainability of farming systems on marginal 
lands by enhancing the production of organic matter, maintaining soil fertility, reducing 
erosion and creating a more favourable microclimate for associated crops and livestock. 
The mixing of trees and crops can also reduce the need for fertilizers and pesticides. These 
services are beyond the direct production roles trees can play in supplying food, fodder, 
fuel wood, building materials, medicines, handicraft and other raw materials for rural 
industries. In today’s modern world, there is competition for housing, industrialization, 
forestry, recreation and agriculture (both crop and livestock production). These must be 
balanced to have a harmonious relationship with the environment. 
This chapter on agroforestry serves to highlight the historical evolution of the system, 
provide a description of agroforestry systems and describe potential benefits of adopting 
agroforestry in the Caribbean region. It also gives a broad overview of agroforestry from 
an international perspective. It should be noted that while agroforestry provides many 
exciting opportunities for farmers, it is not a ‘cure-all’ for all our land-use problems. As 
with any other land-use option, agroforestry involves trade-offs, that is, some short-term 
gains may have to be given up for the sake of long-term sustainability. Throughout the 
chapter, references and examples are provided for countries belonging to the Caribbean 
Community (CARICOM). These 15 countries include Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, 
Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, St Kitts and 
Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. The 
justification for defining the Caribbean as countries within the CARICOM is that most of 
the studies on forestry/agroforestry were organized by the CARICOM secretariat together 
with other global organizations, mainly the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 
354 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
Concept and definition of agroforestry
Agroforestry is often described as an age-old system with only a new name. This system 
of growing trees with crops and/or animals on the same piece of land is an ancient 
practice and has been used by farmers worldwide for many centuries. However, the term 
‘agroforestry’ is recent and was first mentioned in a 1977 study investigating the role of 
trees in agriculture. This study formed the basis for establishing the International Centre 
for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF) in 1978 (Nairobi, Kenya) to promote agroforestry 
research, especially in developing countries. In 2002, ICRAF (still the official name) was 
rebranded as the ‘World Agroforestry Centre’, since it was recognized globally as the leading 
institution in agroforestry research and development.
The World Agroforestry Centre (www.worldagroforestry.org, accessed 06 May 2014) 
defines agroforestry as  ‘a sustainable land management system which increases the 
overall yield of the land, combines the production of crops, forest plants and/or animals 
simultaneously or sequentially, on the same unit of land, and applies management practices 
that are compatible with the cultural practices of the local population’. Agroforestry have also 
been defined as ‘a collective name for land-use systems in which woody perennials (trees or 
shrubs) are grown in association with herbaceous plants (crops or pastures) and/or livestock 
in a spatial arrangement, a rotation or both, and in which there are both ecological and 
economic interactions between the tree and non-tree components of the system’ (Young, 
1989). The core concept of agroforestry is therefore based on the integration of agriculture 
and forestry production systems.
Agroforestry is differentiated from other land-use systems since it must have a tree 
component deliberately planted or retained; and there must be significant interaction 
between the woody and non-woody components of the system. Agroforestry therefore 
involves two or more plant species (at least one must be a woody perennial) and/or animals, 
with two or more outputs. Due to the variety of possible combinations, even the simplest 
agroforestry system is more ecologically and economically-complex than a monocropping 
system. Agroforestry is described as a sustainable, adaptable, multipurpose land-use system 
which allows for:
• Production of multiple products while protecting natural resources
• Emphasis on the use of indigenous trees/shrubs, crops and livestock
• Suitability for low-input farms and fragile ecosystems
• Provision of social, economic and environmental benefits to land users
| 355
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
The aim of agroforestry is to optimize production based on the interactions between 
the components and their physical environment. It is a science, whereby benefits will only 
be obtained from using the correct combination of tree species, crops and/or livestock, 
together with best management practices. Agroforestry should be viewed as more than just 
a combination of trees/crops/livestock, but should strive to meet the specific needs of the 
individual, community and/or population.
Historical background and importance of the 
agroforestry sector
Agroforestry has been a fundamental part of the traditional food production systems 
throughout the Caribbean region for many years. The system of land use in the Caribbean 
was greatly influenced by the early European colonizers, who used the available arable lands 
and cleared the natural forest for cultivation of large expanses of monoculture crops for 
the European market. This system of food production therefore resulted in a decrease of 
biological diversity of the forest species on the islands. The European settlers also introduced 
tropical crops that were not native to the region (e.g. breadfruit) to provide food and thus 
reduce the cost of sustaining the slaves and indentured laborers. 
The traditional systems practiced in the Caribbean usually included forest, fruit, spice, and 
fodder trees, together with plantation crops such as cocoa, coffee, bananas and sugarcane. 
The main agroforestry systems in the larger acreages were cocoa/coffee grown under shade 
trees and forest plantations established using the Taungya system. This perennial system of 
cultivation was important due to the steep sloping hillsides/mountainous terrain found in 
some Caribbean islands. In smaller holdings, farmers practiced a system of multi-layered 
agroforestry using mahogany, cedar, breadfruit, mango, or coconut trees in the upper level; 
a middle layer of cocoa, coffee, bananas and fruit trees; and a lower level of vegetables and 
food crops (e.g. pigeon peas). This type of agroforestry allowed the farmer to have a regular 
source of income, until the perennial trees mature and producing economic products such 
as fruits or timber. Livestock was also used in the traditional systems, but mainly in the 
smaller Caribbean islands. 
Agroforestry is also promoted as a more sustainable and environment-friendly alternative 
to the traditional ‘slash and burn’ agriculture, especially for sloping lands. Slash and burn 
which was once widely practiced is no longer accepted since it involves the removal of trees, 
loosens the valuable top soil and promotes erosion especially on hillsides. In addition, 
the land quickly loses its fertility and farmers usually move on after a few years without 
reforesting the land.  
356 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
While ‘slash and burn’ agriculture involved moving from one location to another, more 
stable agricultural plantations existed in the form of estates. In managing cocoa and coffee 
estates in Trinidad, trees are planted for shade. In the early stages, immortelle was the species 
of choice. This was later replaced by more valuable timber species when it was realised that 
harvesting of the trees provided a good return. Factors such as larceny, scarcity of labour 
and urbanization were responsible for many estates becoming abandoned. Within recent 
times with a shortage of local hardwoods, many landowners seized the opportunity to sell 
their timber trees, for which they obtained good value. At present, several farmers have 
recognised the value of lumber and are reforesting their estates with valuable tree species as 
their main crop. While farmers await the maturation of the trees for harvesting, they plant 
cash crops such as plantains and bananas among the trees. Since the cash crops ensure 
that the farmer is more often on the estate, more attention is placed on other agronomic 
activities such as tree re-planting.
The Caribbean region has seen limited development in the agroforestry sector over the 
decades. The focus on developing agroforestry systems began at a 1987 workshop in Jamaica, 
where various Caribbean countries reported on the status of the forestry/agroforestry 
sector. This workshop led to a joint CARICOM/FAO project to conduct studies on the status 
of the forestry sector (including agroforestry) in the Caribbean region. During the last 25 
years there has been more attention to agroforestry as a sustainable land-use system in 
the Caribbean region. However, there is no established standard or criteria to promote 
agroforestry specifically, or to use it as a tool in land use planning.
General description of the Caribbean region 
The CARICOM region spans a distance of over 4,000 km from the Bahamas in the north to 
Suriname in the south. The Bahamas consist of many islands located SE of Florida, USA and 
are mainly low-lying, dry and contain soils derived from limestone parent material. Most of 
the other CARICOM countries are located in the Caribbean Sea within latitudes of 10–20°N 
and longitudes of 59–78°W (figure 11.1). They form part of the Greater Antilles (Jamaica 
and Haiti), The Leeward Islands (Antigua and Barbuda, St Kitts and Nevis, Montserrat, and 
Dominica), and the Windward Islands (St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Barbados, 
Grenada, and Trinidad and Tobago. The Leeward and Windward Islands make up the 
Lesser Antilles. Belize is found in Central America while Guyana and Suriname are part of 
the South America mainland. The islands of St Kitts, Montserrat, and St Vincent forms part 
of the ‘inner volcanic arc’ and have active or potentially active volcanoes, while low-lying 
coral limestone islands such as Antigua and Barbados form part of the ‘outer limestone arc’. 
| 357
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
In general, Caribbean landscapes were changed as native forests were cleared for 
plantation agriculture, especially sugarcane. This deforestation increased the risk of erosion 
and changed the nature of the land resources. When the land is cleared of vegetation it results 
in declined soil fertility due to increased organic matter decomposition and plant nutrient 
leaching. Presently, the land area covered by forests for Belize, Guyana and Suriname 
(continental countries) is 87.5 percent, while for the Caribbean islands (excluding Haiti) it 
is 40.4 percent (Table 11.1). Only 0.8 percent of Haiti’s land area is under forest. In Haiti, 
impoverished peasant farming has enhanced environmental degradation. Forest trees are cut 
to provide firewood and steep slopes are cultivated which promote soil erosion and further 
environmental degradation. The total forested area in Trinidad and Tobago occupies about 
226,000 ha or 44 percent of the total land area. The government (state) possesses about 
80 percent of these forested lands while the remaining 45,000 ha are privately owned. 
Several of these private owners are being targeted by the Forestry Division to adopt more 
sustainably managed systems such as agroforestry. 
Most of the Caribbean islands have a marine tropical environment and average annual 
temperatures are about 26.7°C with little seasonal variation. The Northeast (NE) Trade 
winds modify the tropical heat year-round and produce most of the precipitation. 
Rainfall not temperature usually distinguishes the season. For example in Trinidad, 
there is a dry season from December to April and a rainy season from May to November.
Figure 11.1: Map of the Caribbean showing location of the 15 CARICOM 
countries (underlined)
358 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
The rainfall varies between the countries with low-lying islands receiving little rainfall, while 
islands such as Dominica with high volcanic peaks receive over 2500 mm of annual rainfall. 
Within the islands there is usually heavier rainfall on the northeast side (windward slopes) 
and less rain in the southwest side (leeward slopes). The distribution of rainfall is important 
since it determines if irrigation is necessary for agriculture and agroforestry systems. Almost 
every year from June to November, the Caribbean experiences hurricanes bringing heavy 
rains and destructive winds. The 2008 hurricane season was particularly severe, causing 
extensive damage of crops and trees, particularly in Haiti, together with several hundred 
deaths. Other natural disasters such as volcanic activity and earthquakes are less common 
in the Caribbean, but can affect the establishment of agroforestry systems in the region.
Table 11.1.  Forest types and percent of land area occupied for Continental 
(Belize, Guyana, and Suriname) and Island countries in the CARICOM 
Region
Country Total Land Natural Plantations Total % of Land 
Area (ha) forests (ha) (ha) (ha) Area
Belize   2,280,000   1,731,820  3,260   1,735,080 76.1
Guyana 21,497,000 18,500,000     700 18,500,700 86.1
Suriname 16,380,000 14,900,000 13,377 14,913,377 91.0
Continental 40,157,000 35,131,820 17,337 35,149,157 87.5
Countries
Antigua and        44,000         15,600 0 15,600 35.5
Barbuda
The Bahamas   1,007,000       466,241 0 466,241 46.3
Barbados        43,100            1,700       40 1,740   4.0
Dominica        75,100          51,770 100 51,870 69.1
Grenada        33,900          18,414 570 18,984 56.0
Haiti   2,756,000 21,000 0 21,000 0.8
Jamaica   1,142,400 335,900 8,187 344,087  30.1
Montserrat        10,100            4,000 20 4,020 38.9
St Kitts and Nevis        26,800          11,000 0 11,000 41.0
St Lucia        61,500          23,157 263 23,420 38.0
St Vincent and the        39,000 12,689 241 12,930 33.1
Grenadines
Trinidad and Tobago      512,800        248,000 13,225 261,225 50.9
Islands (incl. Haiti) 5,751,700 1,209,471 22646 1,232,117 21.4
Islands (excl. Haiti) 2,995,700 1,188,471 22646 1,211,117 40.4
Source: Adapted from Lackhan, N. (2000)
| 359
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Types Of Agroforestry Systems And Practices 
Agroforestry systems can be classified based on the following four criteria (Nair 1993):
• Structural – refers to the composition of the system and the arrangement of the 
components in space and time.
• Functional – based on the main function or use of the components, such as soil 
conservation or soil fertility improvement (i.e. protective or productive).
• Socioeconomic – this refers to the purpose of the system with regard to human 
livelihoods such as poverty alleviation and food security.
• Ecological – refers to the suitability of the agroforestry system for a given 
environment and ecological conditions (e.g. tropical or temperate).
The three components of any agroforestry systems are woody perennials (trees/shrubs), 
herbaceous plants (crops/pasture), and animals/livestock. Based on these three components, 
agroforestry systems are classified for practical purposes into three broad groups (Nair 1993):
• Agrosilvicultural – Crops + Trees
• Agrosilvopastoral – Crops + Trees + Livestock
• Silvopastoral systems – Trees + Pasture/Livestock
Numerous tree and crop species can be used in agroforestry systems (Table 11.2) and 
their selection is critical for successful establishment and production. Some of the factors 
affecting the choice of trees include (Blanco and Lal 2008):
• type of agroforestry system
• growth rate and regrowth potential 
• plant canopy and root system
• use of trees (e.g. fruit or timber)
Table 11.2. Some traditional tree and crop species used in Caribbean 
agroforestry systems
Common name Scientific name Common name Scientific name
Forest Species (Timber) Tree Crops/Fruit Trees
Balata Manilkara bidentata Ackee Blighia sapida
Caribbean pine Pinus caribaea Anar Punica granatum
Cedar Cedrela odorata Avocado Persea americana
Crappo Carapa guianensis Banana/Plantain Musa spp.
Cypre Cordia alliodora Bilimbi Averrhoa bilimbi
360 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
Common name Scientific name Common name Scientific name
Forest Species (Timber) Tree Crops/Fruit Trees
Mahogany Swietenia macrophylla Brazil Nut Bertholletia excels
Mora Mora excelsa Breadfruit Artocarpus altilis
Poui Tabebuia rufescens Caimite Chrysophyllum cainito
Purple heart Peltogyne porphyrocardia Calabash Crescentia cujete
Teak Tectona grandis Carambola Averrhoa carambola
Forest Species (Other) Cashew Anacardium occidentale
Bamboo Bambusa vulgaris Cerise Flacourtia indica
Cocorete Attalea maripa Chataigne Artocarpus camansi
Fat pork Chrysobalanus icaco Chalta Dillenia indica
Flamboyant Delonix regia Chennette Melicoccus bijugatus
Grugru palm Acrocomia aculeata Chinee pommerac Syzygium samarangense
Hog plum Spondias mombin Chinee tamarind Vangueria 
madagascariensis
Immortelle Erythrina poeppigeana Citrus Citrus spp.
Indian almond Terminalia catappa Cocoa Theobroma cacao
Neem Azadirachta indica Coffee Coffea arabica
Tonka bean Dipteryx odorata Coconut Cocos nucifera
Spice Trees Dunks Ziziphus mauritiana
Bay Pimenta racemosa Guava Psidium guajava
Cinnamon Cinamomum zeylencium Jackfruit Artocarpus heterophyllus
Clove Eugenia caryophyllus Jamoon Syzygium cumini
Nutmeg Myristica fragrans Lychee Litchi chinensis
Legume Trees Mamey apple Mammea americana
Acacia Acacia spp. Mamey sapote Pouteria sapota
Gliricidia Gliricidia sepium Mango Mangifera indica
Leucaena Leucaena leucocephala Pawpaw Carica papaya
Sesbania Sesbania spp. Peewah Bactris gasipaes
Food Crops Plantain Musa balbisiana
Black Eye Pea Vigna unguiculata Plum Spondias spp.
Cassava Manihot esculenta Pois doux Inga edulis
Corn Zea mays Pommerac Syzygium malaccense
Dasheen Colocasia esculenta Pommecythere Spondias dulcis
Melongene Solanum melongena Sapodilla Manilkara zapota
Ochro Hibiscus esculentus Sour cherry Phyllanthus acidus
Pigeon pea Cajanus cajan Soursop Annona muricata
Pumpkin Cucurbita maxima Sweet sop Annona squamosa
Sweet potato Ipomoea batatas Tamarind Tamarindus indica
Yam Dioscorea spp. West Indian cherry Malphigia glabra
| 361
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Agrosilvicultural systems
This agroforestry system refers to production of agricultural crops with woody perennials 
on the same unit of land. The tree component can have either a productive or a service 
role, and the components can have a spatial (simultaneous) or temporal (sequential) 
arrangement. Agrosilvicultural systems include alley cropping (hedgerow intercropping), 
shade trees for plantation crops, multi-storey cropping, Taungya system, windbreaks, 
improved fallow, intercropping trees and crops, and a mixture of plantation crops. The 
systems most commonly practiced in the Caribbean are described below.
Plantation crops and shade trees
This agroforestry system refers to the simultaneous production of agricultural crops 
(perennial species) and forest trees. In the Caribbean, cocoa and coffee are important 
plantation crops grown under shade trees because of their sensitivity to direct sunlight. 
Shade is provided by permanent trees which are planted at a spacing which allows between 
25 percent shade (high altitudes) and 35 percent shade (low altitudes) for the cocoa and 
coffee plants. The planting density (trees/ha) of the shade trees will vary according to the 
species of trees used (i.e., its crown size when mature) and the percentage of shade required. 
Some of the common shade trees grown in cocoa plantations are immortelle, cedar, tonka 
bean, breadfruit and hog plum. The immortelle tree provides nitrogen (N), in addition to 
shade from the plant canopy. The root nodules, leaves, and flowers of the immortelle contain 
between four and six percent N, contributing to higher soil N levels and cocoa yields when 
compared to other shade trees.  The major cocoa producing countries in the Caribbean are 
Trinidad and Tobago, Grenada, St Vincent, Haiti, and Jamaica.
Alley cropping (hedgerow intercropping)
Alley cropping refers to an agroforestry intercropping practice in which fast-growing 
species of trees/shrubs are planted closely within the row (‘hedgerows’), and wide between 
the rows (‘alleys’) to allow for planting of agricultural crops. Therefore, trees and crops are 
grown together in the same field at the same time (Nair et al. 1999). Leguminous, high-
value and/or short-duration crops are ideal for use in alley cropping. Depending on the 
tree species used (e.g., fruit trees) crops are not replanted when the trees mature and an 
orchard is established. When legume trees are used (e.g., Leucaena spp.), the hedgerows 
are cut back at the time the crop is planted. The hedgerows are also periodically pruned 
during the crop cycle to prevent shading and reduce competition for nutrients/water with 
the associated food crops. Root pruning is sometimes practiced during the early stages 
of hedgerow establishment. When there are no crops, the hedgerows are allowed to grow 
362 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
unrestricted and cover the land. Alley cropping also enables cropping and fallow periods 
to occur simultaneously on the same unit of land. This means that the farmer can crop 
the land for a longer time before leaving it to fallow. Alley cropping is ideal for small-scale 
farmers but it is also adaptable to mechanized farming in larger holdings.
Contour planting and Conservation buffers
Contour planting is one of the most common agroforestry systems practiced in the 
Caribbean. It involves the planting of trees along the contour line in moderately steep to 
steep slopes (Figure 11.2). Conservation buffers are strips or small areas of land in permanent 
vegetation. Filter strips, field borders, grassed waterways, contour grass strips, and riparian 
buffers are all examples of conservation buffers. They are used to protect ground/surface 
water quality and to reduce erosion (Figure 11.3) on cropland.
Conservation buffers can also be used along streams and around lakes or wetlands. Buffers 
are most effective when they are included as part of a comprehensive conservation system.
Some of the more common types found in the Caribbean are contour grass strips, filter 
strips, and grassed waterways, all of which function in a similar manner. Contour grass strips 
are narrow bands of perennial vegetation established across the slope of a crop field and 
alternated down the slope with strips of crops. Properly designed and maintained contour 
grass strips can reduce soil erosion and minimize transport of sediment pesticides, and other 
potential pollutants before they reach a body of water. These practices are used in many 
traditional Caribbean farming systems across hillsides to control runoff and soil erosion. 
The vegetation consists mainly of perennial grasses established parallel and perpendicular 
to the dominant slope of the field. However, combinations of trees, shrubs and grasses can 
be planted along the contour (Figure 11.4). 
These practices result in greater structural stability of the soil and can provide a higher 
yield and diversity of useful products. The contour grass strips are also known as horizontal 
vegetation strips/barriers. Grassed waterways are strips of grass seeded in areas of cropland 
where water concentrates or flows off a field. While they are primarily used to prevent gully 
erosion, waterways can be combined with filter strips to trap contaminants or field sediment.
Riparian forest buffers, whether natural or man-made, have a dominant woody 
component, which sets them apart from vegetative filter strips that are used to intercept 
surface runoff in agricultural crop lands. 
Windbreaks 
Windbreaks are linear plantings of trees or shrubs (in single or multiple rows) which are 
planted on the border of crops. They are designed to improve crop production and assist 
| 363
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
in soil and water conservation. The Caribbean region can be subjected to strong prevailing 
NE Trade winds, and the establishment of windbreaks is important to crops which are 
sensitive to wind damage (e.g. cocoa and citrus). The tree species that are commonly used 
for windbreaks include nutmeg, clove, cinnamon, mango, neem, and pommerac. 
Some windbreaks can also provide an additional benefit of controlling pests and diseases 
to the economic crop, based on their ability to filter bacterial inoculum and deter the spread 
of viruses by aphids. Windbreaks established using Leucaena spp. is believed to prevent 
bacterial stem canker in papaya. Windbreaks are also favorable because they are unobtrusive 
to the various management practices for the cash crops grown. Windbreaks can help protect 
young crops, maintain soil fertility, reduce soil loss by wind erosion, and pruned vegetation 
and fallen leaves from the trees can act as mulch.
The many benefits of windbreaks, makes it very applicable for extensive use in the 
Caribbean, especially in the Windward Islands. However sometimes hurricanes can cause 
destruction to both the windbreaks and the agricultural crops. When the wind speed is 
high, it can cause physical damage to crops (broken branches and uprooting) together with 
shedding of flower/fruits resulting in reduce crop yield. To minimize this risk to fruit and 
tree crops, windbreaks are established using various tree species. 
Improved fallow
This is an agroforestry practice in which fast-growing trees/shrubs are planted after 
harvesting crops, so that when the land is next cleared for cultivation (i.e. after the fallow 
period) products are available for household use or marketing. The crops and trees therefore 
occupy the same piece of land at different periods in time (sequentially). The trees and 
shrubs may be left to occupy the site for several months or years. The tree species grown 
in natural fallows can produce high-value products such as fruits, medicine, or high-grade 
timber to provide economic benefits during the fallow period.  Alternatively, leguminous 
trees and shrubs can be planted to improve soil fertility. The leaf litter from the trees also 
suppresses weeds, enrich the soil, conserve soil moisture, and after tree removal their roots 
decompose and release additional nutrients. This practice therefore has the potential to 
restore soil fertility more quickly than natural fallows, and to reduce fertilizer costs for 
subsequent crops. 
Traditionally, farmers left the croplands ‘fallow’ after a period of cultivation so that they 
can regain their fertility naturally. However, improved fallows accelerate the process of 
rejuvenation and thereby shorten the length of the natural fallow period. Even though 
improved fallow has its origins in ‘slash-and-burn’ agriculture, the practice can be applied 
to any agricultural land that is not under cultivation in order to rehabilitate and increase 
364 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
the nutrient status of the soil. The effect of improved fallow depends on the length of 
the fallow period and the type of tree species. The recommended tree/shrubs should be 
fast-growing, nitrogen-fixing, and easy to propagate. Examples include various species of 
Leucaena, Sesbania, and Gliricidia. The benefits of improved fallow is that it allows for 
quick restoration of soil fertility (nutrient and organic matter content), nutrient recycling 
from deeper soil horizons, protecting the soil from erosion, reduces weed growth, and allows 
for production of fuelwood thus reducing the burden on the natural forests. Therefore, it 
has great potential for promoting food security through increased soil productivity.
Taungya 
The Taungya system consists of growing annual agricultural crops along with the forestry 
species during the early years of establishment of the forestry plantation. This agroforestry 
system is usually used by Government Forestry Divisions to establish large acreages of 
forest trees, usually for the timber industry. The land belongs to the government or large-
scale estate owners, who allow the subsistence farmers to raise their crops. The farmers are 
required to tend the forestry seedlings and, in return, retain a part or all of the agricultural 
produce. This is beneficial both to the State and to the private farmer.
The Taungya system was introduced in Trinidad in the early 1900’s when the State began 
to establish commercial timber plantations using teak and later Caribbean pine (Figure 
11.5). This system involved short-term contracts to farmers to plant food crops (bananas and 
plantain) on state lands chosen for teak and pine establishment. In the 1980s the method 
was used in Trinidad to establish about 9,000 ha of teak and 4,000 ha of Caribbean pine 
(Lackhan 1992). 
In the past and up to the present time, livestock farmers have planted shade trees in 
their pastures. These pastures were also bounded by trees, which were used as fencing. 
As farmers increasingly realised the value of trees, the feasibility of trees as the main 
crop became more apparent with the use of smaller livestock (sheep and goat) to control 
the grass beneath. Trees were formerly not planted as the main crop, but used more in a 
supplementary role. Today, this is different, as farmers in recognition of the value of trees, 
have made them the main crop on many estates, with other forms of agriculture revolving 
around the tree plantations.
Food crop production takes place during the period between land clearing and the 
plantation establishment phase. The Taungya system can sometimes appear unattractive to 
farmers, as its main objective is wood production, not food. Taungya persists in areas with 
high population pressure and where there is adequate government support and incentives. 
The adoption of this system varies among the Caribbean countries, with Trinidad showing 
some success (Figure 11.6). 
| 365
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Trees in cropland
In this agroforestry practice, trees are grown in combination with annual crops. It is a 
type of intercropping and is widely-used by small-scale farmers in the Caribbean. Farmers 
usually plant a variety of crops integrated with perennial fruit and spice trees. This diversity is 
especially important in prevent land degradation in the smaller islands, which are dominated 
by mountain slopes. Trees with narrow crowns and deep root systems are preferred; while 
the annual crops should require minimum or no-tillage and have a low light requirement. 
In Grenada, food crops such as yam, corn, pigeon peas, sorrel, dasheen and tannia are 
integrated with spice trees such as nutmeg, clove, and cinnamon. Grenada is the world’s 
second largest producer of nutmeg and the sustenance of the spice industry is important in 
providing socioeconomic benefits and food security for the country’s population. In Haïti, 
peasant farmers will traditionally leave the occasional forest trees such mahogany, guaiac 
wood (Guaiacum	officinale) and Haitian catalpa (Catalpa longissima) in the areas that 
they cultivated crops. 
Other Agrosilvicultural practices
These include tree gardens (in Trinidad) whereby combination of several fruit and other 
useful trees are cultivated, sometimes with the inclusion of annual crops. In this practice 
the plant components are of differing stature so that several layers of canopy are formed 
(Figure 11.7).
Silvopastoral system
This is an agroforestry system where trees (shrubs), pastures and/or livestock are 
integrated on the same piece of land. The components can be arranged as a pure stand 
with fodder trees/shrubs (cut-and-carry fodder production) and/or mixed in different 
configurations (e.g. living fences of fodder trees). Silvopastures can be created by planting 
trees in existing pastures or by establishing pastures under existing trees. This system can 
be used on both range and forest lands for the production of forage and tree products. The 
system can also help with soil conservation by growing grasses and trees/shrubs on sloping 
ground. The silvopastoral system can produce high quality forage and timber, together with 
conservation of the environment.
It is important to consider potential markets, soil type, climatic conditions, and species 
compatibility when selecting trees and forages for use in the silvopastoral system. The trees 
grown for timber should be marketable, fast growing, deep rooted, and drought tolerant 
(e.g. Caribbean pine and cypre). Ideally, the forage component should be a perennial which 
is suitable for livestock grazing, compatible with the site/soil, and productive under partial 
shade (e.g. guinea grass - Panicum maximum and signal grass - Brachiaria decumbens). 
Potential livestock choices include cattle, sheep, goats, ducks, turkeys, and chickens. 
366 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
Silvopastoral systems can be established on any land capable of supporting tree and forage 
growth at the same time. However, they require a relatively large land area to sustain timber 
and livestock production. The spacing and arrangement of the tree species is important for 
silvopasture success. Trees can be evenly distributed to optimize growing space and light 
for both trees and forage. If desired, they can be planted in rows or clusters to limit their 
shade and root effects, while providing open spaces for pasture production. Furthermore, 
an understanding of forage growth characteristics and the timing/duration of grazing is 
important in silvopasture management. Since the livestock and tree components can be 
arranged in many combinations, silvopasture is ideal for sites where mechanized farming or 
a structured system is difficult or not required. Examples of silvopastoral systems include:
• Trees on pastures – traditionally used for providing shade to livestock
• Fodder banks – planting of leguminous fodder trees around farmlands e.g. 
• Living fences – Fodder trees are planted on farm boundaries or pasture borders 
• Plantation crops with pastures and animals - Plantation trees such as coconut can 
be planted in a scattered manner on pasture land to provide light shading under 
which cattle and small ruminants can graze (Figure 11.8).
Agrosilvopastoral system
This agroforestry system integrates trees, crops, and livestock (pastures). This allows for 
multiple outputs such as fodder, fuelwood, and food for human consumption. The system 
represents a combination of components in the same unit of land and in a spatial sequence. 
This system is practiced when the farmer wants to reap all the benefits that would be 
obtained from silvopasture and agrosilviculture systems. Agrosilvopastoral systems usually 
consist of overstory trees, understory crops and grazing animals. The trees on the land may 
be native (spontaneous) or planted; the crops may include cereals or forage crops; and 
the grazing animals may include sheep, goat or cattle. The main type of agrosilvopastoral 
system practiced in the Caribbean is homegardens. The word ‘homegarden’ has been used 
loosely to describe diverse practices, from growing vegetables behind houses to complex 
multi-storeyed systems. It usually refers to a land-use system on private lands surrounding 
individual houses with a definite fence, in which several tree species are cultivated together 
with annual and perennial crops; often with the inclusion of small livestock. The homegarden 
consist of a small acreage, and planted with various plants from herbaceous vegetable crops 
to medium size trees. There are many forms of such gardens varying in how intensively 
they are cultivated and their location with regard to the home. The home garden provides 
plant and animal food for home consumption, and is usually located close to dwellings 
| 367
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
for security and convenience. They are also characterized by low capital input and simple 
technology or equipment. Fish farming or aquaculture combined with the growing of 
crops and trees represents a unique agrosilvopastoral system. Aquaculture in agroforestry 
practices can involve rice cultivation with fish and trees, as well as fish ponds in farmland 
with trees (Figures 11.9 and 11.10).
Benefits Of Agroforestry 
Agroforestry is practiced throughout the world, in order to address some form of 
national socio-economic development, such as, increased food production, natural resource 
conservation, environmental protection and poverty alleviation. In some countries, the 
primary motivating factor in the adoption of any agroforestry system is the economic gain. 
Agroforestry systems have been successfully established and maintained in countries such 
as India, China and Papua New Guinea. These countries have humid tropical environments 
that are similar to the Caribbean and a brief description of their success given below to 
highlight their applicability to the Caribbean region.
In India, agroforestry systems have played an important role in programmes for controlling 
shifting cultivation. In West Bengal and Karala, the Taungya system was used successfully, 
thus creating forest villages, which provided labour for forestry operations (Singh 1987). 
The farmer generally leaves useful trees, such as mango, tamarind and jackfruit in the areas 
being cultivated to provide them with edible products. In suitable areas, along with rice and 
millet, crops such as coffee are planted under the shade of silver oak (Crevillea robusta) 
and other crops such as tobacco and tumeric are grown. 
In China, increased industrialization activities have resulted in increased demand 
for timber and energy, which has led to more pressure on the land. In order to reduce 
problems such as soil erosion, siltation, flooding and desertification, agroforestry polices 
and legislation was created. These policies were designed to enhance the farmer’s ability to 
produce more food, to put land to multiple use, to reforest the bare lands and, to expand 
forested areas for conservation.
In Papua New Guinea, a programme called the ‘Atzera Range Conservation Programme’was 
developed to address the problem of excessive soil erosion and runoff which causes flood 
damage to roads, bridges and the sewage system of the city (Harris 1979). These problems 
were caused by the migrants coming to the city from rural areas that establish squatter 
settlements and felled many trees for fuel and house-building. Since the Atzera Range is 
an extensive steeply sloping hill system adjacent to Lae, the second largest urban centre, a 
corrective programme was developed and implemented, based on the use of agroforestry 
techniques and sound ecological planning. 
368 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
In the Caribbean region, agroforestry features prominently in traditional farming systems. 
These systems involve use of various tree species such as forest, fruit, fodder, cocoa and 
coffee. Food forests have been described as a good example of agroforestry, and occur in 
islands such as St Kitts, Montserrat and Jamaica, where dry ravines called guts (or ghants) 
are used for growing mangoes, breadfruit, ackee, avocado and other fruit trees (Lackhan 
2000). The Taungya system has been utilised by several forestry departments within the 
region for establishing forest plantations. Livestock are also reared in association with tree 
crops and forests trees. The leaves and stems from Gliricidia are used for feeding sheep 
while Leucaena is used for dry season feeding of livestock in the region. Kudzu (Pueraria 
lobata) has been used to improve the traditional system of shifting cultivation in Belize, 
and has the benefit of improving soil nitrogen.
Agroforestry involves the production of multiple outputs which provide subsistence/
income to farmers and minimizes the risk of total failure by the production system (Nair 
1993). It also aims to create a balance between increased agricultural development and 
environment conservation, and provides many benefits such as improving soil fertility, soil 
conservation, stabilizing river banks, and providing various tree products (fuelwood, timber, 
fruits). Agroforestry can be a viable option for reducing land degradation and increasing 
agricultural productivity in the Caribbean. Agroforestry systems are important because they 
provide many socioeconomic and environmental benefits. Agroforestry is seen as a tool that 
can enhance food security and improve rural livelihoods, increase soil fertility, improve soil 
and water conservation, aid in carbon sequestration, and help in the restoration of degraded 
lands. Agroforestry systems also increases biodiversity, creates additional wildlife habitat 
and support farmers in rural communities (Nair 1993). They also provide additional farm 
products such as timber, pulpwood, firewood, posts, fruit, nuts, and fodder. Agroforestry 
represents a collection of multipurpose practices that are enduring and help achieve a 
sustainable agriculture. It is a concept based on the interface between agriculture and 
forestry and it is a land-use approach of great potential value. Forests provide a wide range 
of productive as well as protective functions, contribute to socio-economic development 
and represent an important cultural asset.  In terms of their protective functions, forests 
are important for their favourable impact on soil and hydrological systems, maintaining 
clean water and reducing the risks and impacts of floods, erosion, and strong winds. Forests 
also play a key role role in carbon sequestration and mitigation of climate change. In the 
subsequent sections, three major categories of benefits, namely ecological/environmental, 
economic and sociological/psychological, will be described. 
| 369
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Ecological/Environmental
Soil fertility and nutrient cycling
Soil fertility refers to the capacity of a soil to support plant growth on a sustained basis 
under given climatic conditions and land characteristics. Agroforestry systems can be critical 
in improving soil fertility. For example, leguminous trees planted as fallows can accumulate 
significant amounts of nitrogen in their leaves and roots, which is then made available to 
crops. Some of the species used to improve soil fertility also have nutritive value as fodder 
and can improve the quality of animal manures. Agricultural crops utilize nutrients from the 
surface layers of the soil while forest crops make use of the nutrients at the lower horizons. 
There is little need for chemicals as the presence of trees shade out weeds, thus reducing 
the need of chemical herbicides which destroy beneficial soil organisms. Fast growing trees 
e.g. Acacia and Leucaena aid in nitrogen fixation by absorption of nitrogen from the air 
thus making it available to other plants present. 
Continuous cropping of the soil (especially by monoculture) without adequate replacement 
of nutrients can lead to a decline in soil fertility. In the Caribbean region many soils lack 
adequate plant nutrients and organic matter. While artificial fertilizers can provide major 
nutrients (N, P, K), plant s require 16 essential nutrients for adequate growth and yield. 
The incorporation of woody perennials (deciduous) and multiple crop species (with 
various rooting depths) allows for the recycling of nutrients. Soil fertility can be improved 
or sustained from the decomposition of above and below ground plant biomass (such as 
fallen leaves, crop residues, and roots from harvested trees). When leguminous species 
are integrated in the agroforestry system, soil fertility also increases as legumes convert 
atmospheric nitrogen to the plant available form (nitrates). 
Soil and water conservation
Agroforestry systems can improve soil and water conservation by reducing soil erosion 
caused by wind and water. They also reduce the transport of non-point source pollutants (e.g. 
chemicals and sediment) to water bodies (e.g. rivers and lakes), while retaining fertilizers 
and nutrients on the farmland. Agroforestry systems reduce surface runoff, improve water 
infiltration and stabilize the soil.
 Due to the humid tropical environment of the Caribbean, there can be periods of intense 
rainfall and flooding leading to soil erosion. Soil erosion removes the nutrient and organic 
matter rich topsoil, resulting in a decline in soil fertility. In agroforestry systems, woody 
perennial plants (with deep root systems) can be planted on steep slopes which are unsuitable 
for crop cultivation or grazing. When the woody perennials are established they provide a 
micro-environment conducive to the growth of other plant species. Trees and shrubs can 
370 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
improve the infiltration of water in the soil thus reducing surface runoff. Trees also reduce 
wind speed and improve soil structure which helps to reduce soil erosion. Agroforestry is 
relevant to soil conservation since the initial cost of establishing erosion control is usually 
lower than engineering methods (Young 1987). In addition, crop yields can be maintained 
or increased due to control of soil loss. Agroforestry can also reduce the cost of reclamation 
for degraded lands by using trees which improve soil fertility. Examples of agroforestry 
practices that have the potential to control erosion include alley cropping and conservation 
buffers. Agroforestry systems are usually practice on slopes of 10°–40° using suitable soil 
conservation practices. They have also been an integral part of watershed management 
plans in several of the Caribbean countries, thus improving water quality and quantity. 
Trees also assist in soil and water conservation as soil structure is improved by the presence 
of tree roots, resulting in increased infiltration of water into the soil. Leaf litter produced by 
trees protects soil from the impact of rains, while tree roots help to hold the soil in place. 
Trees are soil builders and soil protectors, they can be used to rebuild poor soils, stabilize 
steep slopes and reduce soil erosion, thus enhancing agricultural production (Sanchez 
1987). Agroforestry has potential for erosion control since the canopy and leaf litter cover 
the soil, the tree roots stabilize the soil and the trees also act as barriers to runoff. The use 
of contour strips in agroforestry systems is cost effective (with low initial establishment 
and annual maintenance costs compared to engineering methods). 
Carbon sequestration and climate change
Increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the earth’s atmosphere are linked to 
global warming and climate change. CO2 is the principal anthropogenic greenhouse gas 
with emissions arising from fossil fuel combustion, cement production, land use change 
and deforestation. The atmospheric CO2 concentration has increased from 280 ppm in 
1750 (onset of industrialization) to 315 ppm in 1958, and to 396 ppm in 2013, mainly due 
to the burning of fossil fuels. As global greenhouse emissions increase, they can affect 
human health, food security and contribute to environmental degradation. Forest lands are 
important to the carbon cycle since 610 Pg (1 Pg = 1015 g) of carbon is stored in the global 
vegetation biomass (Lal 2004). Carbon sequestration refers to the uptake of atmospheric 
CO2 during photosynthesis and the transfer of accumulated carbon into vegetation and 
soil pools for long-term storage. Plants also act as a sink for CO2; therefore any decrease 
in forest area reduces the carbon stock of the forest ecosystem. During the past 25 years, 
agroforestry has been recognized as a sustainable, integrated land-use system with the 
potential of sequestering carbon. Nair et al. (2010) reported that the carbon sequestration 
potential varies due to ecology and management, and ranges from 0.3 to 15.2 Mg ha−1 year−1 
| 371
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
aboveground, and 30–300 Mg C ha−1 up to 1-m depth in the soil (belowground biomass). 
Woody perennials (trees) represent the most important C pool in aboveground biomass. 
Therefore integrating more trees in the agricultural landscapes by adopting agroforestry 
can increase the potential for carbon sequestration and reduce the effects of climate change. 
Agroforestry systems can further contribute to the mitigation of climate change by providing 
a permanent soil cover, ensuring long term stability of carbon storage in fluctuating 
environments, and improving the efficiency of use of soil, water and climatic resources. 
Agroforestry systems can play an important role in climate change adaptation and 
mitigation in Caribbean countries. The increase biodiversity of agroforestry systems provide 
a safety net during periods of climate induced vulnerability and increases resilience to 
climate change. Adoption of agroforestry systems by Caribbean farmers can help ameliorate 
the effects of climate change by helping to stabilize erosion, improve soil and water quality, 
indirectly increase crop yields, increase biodiversity, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and 
increase carbon sequestration. Agroforestry is also an important component of sustainable 
land use and development.
Economical
The inclusion of agricultural crops often results in increased tree production and less costs 
for tree management e.g. fertilization of agricultural crops in Taungya also benefits tree 
growth. Income can be generated for the farmer through the provision of by-products, which 
can be obtained from trees such as fruits and medicine. Composting of leaves, branches and 
twigs can provide a source of nutrients thus saving on the purchase of fertilizers. Agroforestry 
systems can provide economic benefits for the farmer both in the short-term (e.g. food) as 
well as the long-term (e.g. timber). Forages from leguminous trees such as Gliricidia and 
Leucaena can be a digestible source of protein-rich fodder as well as shade for livestock. It 
can also be used for supplementary feeding when grasses may be in shortage as in the dry 
season. The fodder trees and shrubs can be given to the livestock using a ‘cut and carry’ 
system or the animals may be allowed to graze the fields. A few countries in the Caribbean 
(e.g. Haiti) use firewood as the main source of energy. An increase in the number of trees 
planted and better management of existing resources can provide both fuelwood and other 
tree products. If fuelwood is limited, it can influence the amount and type of food cooked, 
thus affecting the family’s nutrition. If wood production is increase for fuel use, other energy 
sources such as cow-dung and crop residues can be left in the fields. Fuelwood is mainly 
collected by women and the further the source of the fuel wood, the greater the workload. 
Agroforestry enables rural households to produce firewood which is easily accessible and 
close to the family farm. 
372 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
Social/Psychological
Agroforestry practices can help in the prevention of environmental degradation and 
contribute to sustainable rural development, especially in regions where human-induced 
activities have resulted in a fragile ecosystem. Agroforestry can provide a source of 
employment and generate income for small-scale farmers in rural communities. Since 
agroforestry is an alternative land use system, it may be used as a tool by farmers practicing 
shifting cultivation as a means to provide them with better social service and improved living 
conditions. Tree products can be obtained throughout the year giving year round labour 
opportunities and regular income. In areas of shifting cultivation, a modernized agroforestry 
system can be implemented, where tree crops are rotated with a short period of agricultural 
production. This may be more acceptable than a shift to permanent annual crop production. 
Also, a sense of pride and fulfilment that one is contributing to the environmental and 
socio-economic welfare of the nation can contribute to an individual’s esteem.
 Agricultural Performance Under Agroforestry Systems
A number of factors influence agroforestry development since systems can exist under a 
range of biophysical and socioeconomic conditions (Nair 1993). Factors that can influence 
the land owner’s decision to adopt agroforestry or to select a particular system include:
• Biophysical conditions such as climate, soil type, slope, and water availability.
• The types of government policies and incentives for developing agroforestry systems.
• The tenure of land, crops and trees, which determine if it is beneficial for farmers.
• Technical support and extension services for the supply of inputs and for market 
delivery.
• The needs, skills and education level of the land owner together with labor 
availability.
 Agroforestry Policy and Legislation
This is necessary in order to protect and conserve the forest and wildlife resources in the 
region. It serves to safeguard against the exploitation of marketable species in the natural 
forests. There are no specific agroforestry policies, but agroforestry is covered under the 
forest policy and legislation in each country. The status of forest policy and legislation varies 
greatly between the CARICOM countries. All of the CARICOM countries implement some 
type of forest policy except Barbados, which has passed a number of Acts relating to tree 
conservation. Belize has a National Forest and Wildlife Policy which is over 50 years old 
| 373
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
but still relevant. Legislation in Belize includes the Forest Ordinance, Forest Fire Protection 
Ordinance, Private Forest (Conservation) Ordinance, National Park Systems Act and the 
Wildlife Protection Act. In Trinidad and Tobago, forest policy includes the Forest Act and 
the Conservation of Wildlife Act.
 Adoption of Agroforestry systems
Compared to monocropping, agroforestry can be a more economical option (due to lower 
expenditure on large machinery, equipment, and fertilizers) for small-scale farmers to 
support food production while preserving the environment. However, there are some factors 
which can affect the adoption of agroforestry by farmers such as access to information on 
agroforestry, training opportunities, good quality planting material, land tenure, and size 
of available land.
Agroforestry have been practiced on a limited scale in the Caribbean islands of Antigua, 
Dominica, Jamaica, St Kitts and Nevis, and Trinidad and Tobago. The other Caribbean 
islands have very little experience in agroforestry. In Antigua, agroforestry has been 
developed into an intensive form of land use combining agricultural crops, shrubs and 
trees. In Dominica, multiple storey cropping systems have been established in large estates 
and consist of coconut, banana, citrus, coffee, and cocoa. In small farms, fruit trees, root 
crops and vegetables are more common. In Jamaica, agroforestry have been practiced for 
several decades, mainly using a multi-storey system. The top storey usually consists of 
cedar, breadfruit, mango and/or coconut, the middle layer has cocoa, coffee, bananas and/
or guava, and the ground layer contains peas, vegetables, sweet potato, yam or hot peppers. 
In Trinidad and Tobago, the Taungya system is used for the establishment plantations of 
teak and Caribbean pine. The next most common agroforestry practice is the establishment 
of an upper storey of cedar, mahogany or immortelle with a lower storey of cocoa, coffee 
and/or bananas.
Current challenges in agroforestry systems 
Agroforestry activities have not been well-documented or differentiated from forested 
lands in many of the Caribbean countries. Research and analysis of agroforestry systems 
have focused on the physical aspects of the systems but the economic contributions at 
the farm level have not been systematically assessed. The financial benefit of agroforestry 
systems are rarely the primary objective for promoting agroforestry or on-farm tree 
establishment. Therefore, farmers lack the motivation to establish agroforestry systems 
since it is viewed as a form of subsistence farming and not a generator of income and this 
may have contributed to project failures. Therefore, agroforestry systems must be advertised 
374 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
as profitable by providing examples of crop production increases, commercialization of 
tree-derived products, and provision of financial incentives to farmers.
There is also need for further research on the development of agroforestry systems 
specific to the Caribbean. This includes research in silviculture, natural forest management, 
hydrology, land use and wildlife management. Extension officers are usually trained in the 
field of agriculture and may not have the knowledge and experience to influence adoption 
of agroforestry systems by farmers. In terms of practical limitations, farmers may not be 
aware of tree-crop interactions in agroforestry systems which may influence the success of 
the operation. Therefore some key considerations when designing an agroforestry system 
include:
• Increasing the overall value of the system,
• Ensuring trees and crops are complementary
• Decreasing or eliminating competition
• Minimizing crop displacement, through appropriate tree management.
There are many constraints in the Caribbean region which influence agroforestry and 
forestry in general. These include the limited size of the Caribbean islands, high and 
increasing population density, uncontrolled grazing and shifting cultivation, soil erosion 
and sedimentation, decreasing forest resources (which are not replaced), not utilizing lands 
to its productive potential, decline in fuel wood, and natural disasters (e.g. hurricanes and 
earthquakes). Preference for cultivation of plantation crops (e.g. bananas) because of market 
demand also represents a constraint to the implementation of agroforestry systems.
 Improvement in technical knowledge and skills
In 1997, the Forestry Division of Trinidad and Tobago received funding for a community-
based forestry and agroforestry project under the Public Sector Investment Programme 
(PSIP).  The project was implemented to assist in preventing and reversing the cycle of 
deforestation and land degradation on private lands, particularly landowners with large 
parcels of land, and who were willing to commit land and other resources to relatively long-
term forestry and agroforestry projects. Community-based groups were also encouraged to 
participate in the programme.  Specific objectives of the project included: 
• The promotion of sustainable land-use practices
• The development of economically and ecologically viable forestry and agroforestry 
systems
• The restoration of degraded private lands
| 375
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
• The optimization of timber production on private lands
• The generation of employment opportunities in rural/agricultural communities
In 1999, a revised Agricultural Incentive Programme was introduced, in which for the 
first time, incentives for forestry operations were included. These incentives have increased 
the implementation of forestry-related activities on private lands, specifically agroforestry. 
Within this context the Forestry Division assisted in the following ways:
• Providing technical assistance to farmers, community groups and other organizations
• Processing incentives to assist farmers in establishing and maintaining plots
• Monitoring and assessing projects
• Conducting basic training in forestry and agroforestry practices
Legislation and policy reform
In the region there is the need to modify existing legislation to reflect recently adopted 
policies aimed at protecting and promoting agroforestry systems. In order to promote 
agroforestry, there must be legislation to provide security of tenure for small-scale farmers, 
which can be achieved via policies which guarantee equal access to land resources. The 
establishment of a system which allows the separation of the ownership of land from the 
ownership of trees would open new possibilities for farmers without land. In order to be 
effective, agroforestry requires that the farmers are given clearly established rights to the 
land and to the trees they plant.
The Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago has approved a new National 
Forest Policy and National Protected Areas Policy (2011), which provides the guidance for 
the development of appropriate legislative and administrative framework for the sustainable 
management of the forest resources of Trinidad and Tobago. The Policy recognizes that 
forests, forest resources and forest use contribute significantly to national development, 
livelihoods and human well-being, and seeks to encompass all the main dimensions of forest 
conservation, use and management, given that the functions of forests are varied and the 
relationships between forests and other sectors are complex. 
Potential for Food and Nutrition security
In developing countries, agroforestry can contribute towards alleviating poverty and 
advancing food security by increasing crop and livestock production through innovative 
technologies. In many Caribbean countries, introduction of agroforestry systems to rural 
communities can reduce hunger by increasing crop production through improved soil 
376 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
fertility. The increase in population size and continued environmental degradation in the 
Caribbean region has resulted in reduced food production and the inability of countries 
to meet their food demands. The total population of the CARICOM countries (excluding 
Haiti) has increased from 5.9 million in 1990 to 6.85 million in 2010 (a 16 percent increase); 
and is projected to reach 10 million by 2050. Haiti conducted its two previous population 
census in 1980 and 2004; however, the population for 1990 and 2010 has been estimated 
at 7.1 million and 9.7 million, respectively, representing an increase of 37 percent (Table 
11.3). Haiti’s population is larger than all the other CARICOM countries combined and is 
the most affected by environmental degradation. 
Food security is defined as the physical and economic access to food for all people at all 
times. Agroforestry have tremendous potential in providing food for local consumption and 
reducing the food import bill. Agroforestry systems include growing a variety of useful trees, 
annual crops and livestock thereby preventing micronutrient malnutrition in regions were 
nutrient deficiency may occur from consumption of a single or few food source (dietary 
diversity or quality).
An important aspect of agroforestry is crop diversification which allows for a wider range 
of food products to eat and sell, improved nutrition, and the ability to spread the risk in 
production due to varying weather conditions. The production in agroforestry systems can 
be complementary, where overall yields are greater for the system as a whole than if one 
species only was present. Also agroforestry systems can be synergistic, where total yields 
are greater than the sum of the individual components if grown separately (Nair 1993).
Agroforestry systems allows for symbiotic economic and ecological interactions between 
components to maximize, sustain and diversify the total land output. They incorporate 
perennial trees which are useful for fuelwood, fruit and fodder, together with annual 
crops. Agroforestry systems can be established on soils of low fertility or degraded soils, 
as well as recuperating soil nutrients over a period of years. They can reduce farmer’s risk 
to seasonal environmental variations and in the long-term maintain and increase soil 
quality. Agroforestry allows farmers to make the best use of their land, can boost field crop 
yields, and diversify income. Thus it can help in bringing previously unsuitable land into 
production, therefore increasing the food supply and provide food and nutrition security 
for the developing countries in the Caribbean. 
| 377
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Table 11.3. Population for each CARICOM country for the 1990/91 and 
2010/11 census years.
Country 1990/91 2010/11 % 
Change
Antigua and Barbuda 60,840 90,801 49.2
The Bahamas 255,049 346,900 36.0
Barbados 260,491 272,112 4.5
Belize 189,392 312,698 65.1
Dominica 71,183 72,729 2.2
Grenada 85,123 109,553 28.7
Guyana 723,723 763,322 5.5
Jamaica 2,380,666 2,702,300 13.5
Montserrat1 11,314 5,020 -55.6
St Kitts and Nevis 40,615 52,650 29.6
St Lucia 133,308 163,229 22.4
St Vincent and the Grenadines 107,598 101,352 -5.8
Suriname 355,2402 531,170 49.5
Trinidad and Tobago 1,213,733 1,324,699 9.1
Subtotal 5,888,275 6,848,535 16.3
Haiti3 7,110,000 9,719,932 36.7
Total 12,998,275 16,568,467 27.5
1 Population decreased due to external migration from the unsafe zone of the Soufrière 
Hills Volcano
2 Value from 1980 Population census
3 Estimated values
Sources: www.caricomstats.org and www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-
factbook/ (Accessed 28 April 2014)
CONCLUSION
Agroforestry is only a new word for an old practice: it is based on forestry, agriculture, 
animal husbandry, land resource management, and other disciplines that all form the 
systematic background of land use. Furthermore, it encompasses an awareness of interactions 
between humans and the environment and between demand and available resources in a 
given area. Although science can improve agroforestry practices, an important aspect for 
the Caribbean region is to mobilize and implement what is already known. Agroforestry can 
significantly increase the production of forest and agricultural products (multiple outputs), 
while at the same time ensuring the land is used at its maximum potential. Agroforestry is 
therefore a sustainable approach to land-use management whereby agriculture and forestry 
378 |
Agroforestry Systems and Practices in the Caribbean
are combined into an integrated production system resulting in maximum benefits to the 
land owner. It has great scope and potential in providing social, economic and environmental 
services to improve the lives of the people in the Caribbean region. 
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We will like to express our gratitude to Mr. Goolab Ramroop (Forestry Division, Trinidad 
and Tobago) and Mr. Terry Sampson (The University of the West Indies, St Augustine, 
Trinidad) for providing photos of the various agroforestry systems. We also like to thank 
Mr Jagessar Dan, a vibrant agroforestry farmer from Rio Claro, Trinidad.
REFERENCES
Blanco, H., and R. Lal. 2008. Principles of Soil Conservation and Management. New York: 
Springer.
Harris, J.A. 1979. The Atzera Project: Ecological Management of the Atzera Range Adjoining 
Lae, Papua New Guinea: An Initial Proposal. Technical Paper No. 4 of the Papua New 
Guinea Human Ecology Project (PNGHEP).
Lackhan, N. 1992. An Assessment of Forestry and Related Environmental Matters in the 
English-Speaking Caribbean. Rome: FAO.
Lackhan, N. 2000. Forest Management and Conservation in the Caribbean. Rome: FAO.
Lal, R. 2004. Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Global Climate Change and Food 
Security. Science 304:1623–26.
Nair, P.K.R. 1993. An Introduction to Agroforestry. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer 
Academic Publishers.
Nair, P.K.R., R.J. Buresh, D.N. Mugendi and C.R. Latt. 1999. Nutrient Cycling in Tropical 
Agroforestry Systems: Myths and Science. In Agroforestry in Sustainable Agricultural 
Systems, ed. L.E. Buck, J.P. Lassoie and E. C.M. Fernandes. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Nair, P.K.R., V.D. Nair, B.M. Kumar and J.M. Showalter. 2010. Carbon Sequestration in 
Agroforestry Systems. Adv. Agron. 108:237–307.
Sanchez, P.A. 1987. Soil Productivity and Sustainability in Agroforestry Systems. In 
Agroforestry: A Decade of Development, ed. H.A. Steppler and P.K.R. Nair, 205–22. 
Nairobi: ICRAF. 
Singh, G.B. 1987. Agroforestry in the Indian Subcontinent: Past, Present and Future. In 
Agroforestry: A Decade of Development, ed. H. A. Steppler and P.K.R. Nair, 117–38. 
Nairobi: ICRAF. 
Young, A. 1989. Agroforestry for Soil Conservation. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.
| 379
A Method for Growing Tilapia 
in Atlantic Seawater in St Kitts: 
A Sustainable Alternative to 
Traditional Coastal Fishery Systems
Barrington E.O. Brown
INTRODUCTION
Aquaculture is the fastest growing animal food-producing sector, with 
the per capita supply increasing from 0.7 kg in 1970 to 7.8 kg in 2008; an 
average annual growth rate of 6.6 percent (Murray 2014).  Aquaculture is set 
to overtake capture fisheries as a source of food fish globally.  Between 2006 
and 2008, aquaculture consumption increased from 42.6 percent to 45.7 
percent worldwide.  In the Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) region, 
Chile, Brazil and Ecuador have been the leaders in aquaculture production 
with a production rise from 0.1 percent to 9.6 percent in 30 years.  
The aquaculture sector is not well developed in the CARICOM region. The 
main reason is that most CARICOM states have limited land and fresh water 
resources.  In the mid-1990s, the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States 
(OECS) members of CARICOM recommended that land-based aquaculture 
should not be the focus of their fisheries development thrust, but instead 
should be a subsistence activity for small farmers.  Some CARICOM states, 
such as Suriname, Guyana and Belize, however, have ample supplies of 
land and fresh water which can support aquaculture. In contrast, most 
island states in the Caribbean have large expanses of marine space, which 
have the potential for development of the marine-based aquaculture or 
‘mariculture’. Because of the limited potential growth of wild catches in 
the Caribbean region, sustainable expansion and intensification of fish 
production through responsible aquaculture development should be a major 
objective for intensification of fish production. The CARICOM approach to 
aquaculture development will have to be multifaceted to address the range 
C H A P T E R  TWELVE
A Method for Growing Tilapia in Atlantic Seawater in St Kitts
of available natural land and fresh water resources in the region, while incorporating the 
commercial elements.  St Kitts and Nevis, however, has concluded that an aquaculture sector 
will create investment opportunities, and could, in its most developed version, create many 
job opportunities for highly skilled people both at the production and management levels. 
The CRFM identified aquaculture as a priority since 2002 and an aquaculture development 
policy formulation was identified as one of the areas to be addressed under the CRFM/
JICA Master Plan Study (2009–2011). Recognizing the need to put in place a mechanism to 
promote and provide support for the development of aquaculture in the region, the CRFM 
Secretariat, in 2012 established a Working Group to Promote Sustainable Aquaculture 
Development (WGA) at the national and regional levels, mainly for the purposes of: 
increasing food production and security; improving rural income and employment; 
diversifying farm production; and increasing foreign exchange earnings and savings, as 
well as, advising the Caribbean Fisheries Forum on policies, programmes and projects to 
promote the development of aquaculture.  It is however important that the WGA considers 
the major challenges for aquaculture development in the Caribbean, which include: 
availability of freshwater; technology transfer; feed access and availability; innovative 
technical assistance for small-scale farmers; governance and political willingness; and 
application of the Ecosystem Approach to Aquaculture.
Globally, tilapia is the third most important fish in aquaculture after carp and salmon; 
worldwide production exceeded 1,500,000 metric tons in 2002 and increased annually. 
Because of their high protein content, large size, rapid growth (six to seven months to grow 
to harvest size), and palatability, a number of tilapiine cichlids—specifically, various species 
of Oreochromis, Sarotherodon and Tilapia—are the focus of major aquaculture efforts. The 
species raised in fish farms include salmon, trout, cod, carp, catfish, sea bass, tilapia and 
others. Today, the vast majority of Atlantic salmon and rainbow trout are farmed intensively 
in fish farms.
The Nile tilapia has distinctive, regular, vertical stripes extending as far down the body as 
the bottom edge of the caudal fin, with variable coloration.  Adults reach up to 60 cm (24 in) 
in length and up to 4.3 kg (9.5 lb) and lives for up to nine years.  It tolerates brackish water 
and survives in temperatures between eight and 42°C (46 and 108 °F).  It is an omnivore, 
feeding on plankton, as well as, on higher plants.  Introduced tilapia can easily become an 
invasive species (see Tilapia as exotic species).  It is a species of high economic value and 
is widely introduced outside its natural range, (which is similar to the Mozambique tilapia 
(O. mossambicus), and is the most commonly cultured cichlid (Cook 2007).  Recent studies 
in Kenya showed that this fish feeds on mosquito larvae, making it a possible tool in the 
fight against malaria in Africa. 
| 381
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Present Situation
Small islands with no significant rivers, streams, brooks or suitable freshwater ponds and 
clay have always had to forgo assistance to develop aquaculture. With the rapid depletion 
of reef fishes in the Caribbean, St Kitts imports fish for the local tourism industry as well 
as for local consumption. 
In the Federation of St Kitts and Nevis (SKN), solutions are being sought and developed 
through the St Kitts and Nevis Aquaculture Pilot Project & Environmental Research 
(SNAPPER).  This project was conceptualized as a research, development and training entity 
in 1999 and commenced Research and Development (R&D) in 2006 in response to the 
reality that marine capture of fish was on the decline, while aquaculture yields and sales were 
increasing at a phenomenal rate.  In addition, the real possibilities of employment creation, 
food security and economic viability, presented a lucrative development opportunity. 
Challenges that Led to the Choice of Atlantic Sea Water
The absence of suitable clay deposits required for pond lining further complicated 
aquaculture development initiatives in St Kitts, which is one of the smallest islands in 
the Caribbean, with no running rivers or pond sealing clay. In addition, the public water 
supply is expensive and relies heavily on available aquifers for good fresh water sources. 
The island is surrounded by the Caribbean Sea on one side and the Atlantic on the other. 
The first challenge to start the project of tilapia production in the Atlantic sea water was to 
find a suitable site for establishing the research ponds.  Because official endorsement was 
not given, and international experts advised against this aquaculture project, land access 
was as a problem.   Eventually, private sector benevolence provided a peppercorn lease for 
⅛ of an acre of land bordering the Atlantic and the project was initiated. 
This project began in 1999 after it was discovered that a fisherman in Jamaica caught 
a tilapia in his seine net. Further investigations were carried out at the fisheries complex 
at Twickenham farm in Jamaica, where experimental brood ponds were in operation. 
The information received provided a departure towards a non-traditional approach and 
technique for farming tilapia. The site on the Atlantic coast was more appropriate because 
waste water from city buildings and dwellings along the several ghauts running through 
Basseterre made their exit in the Caribbean Sea. Other private sector donors have since 
provided additional lands and the Government of Australia has contributed substantial 
project development funds.  Locally, duty-free concessions on an item-by-item basis have 
been also granted to the project.  The project currently farms freshwater tilapia in 100 
percent Atlantic seawater.  
382 |
A Method for Growing Tilapia in Atlantic Seawater in St Kitts
Developmental Issues that Must be Addressed
Any attempt to successfully develop an aquaculture industry must ensure that 
consideration is given to policy, funding, land availability, water quality and suitable feed. 
Some of these issues are now discussed. 
National Policy
The introduction of Aquaculture as an industry or sector must be developed within the 
context of a national policy.  Without a sound policy, allied government departments will not 
acknowledge their required input, or commitment. Unfortunately, the practice of divorcing 
aquaculture from agriculture is a not a well-informed practice, certainly not an industry 
best practice.  This situation can be corrected by any Ministry of Agriculture through its 
programme development department, or as a planned and funded aspect of a Department 
of Marine Resources.
Water quality and availability
In the aquaculture project in St Kitts, the principal operational challenges included 
water quality and availability. The seawater environment necessitated the use of corrosion 
resistant water pumps.  However, the turbulence in the ocean at times resulted in PVC pipe 
abrasion, due to incessant wave action and pipe contact with reefs.  Other minor problems 
included draft tides and excessive seaweed flow at the intake point.  The Atlantic is never 
calm, and the threat of a devastating hurricane has been heavily factored in the design of the 
fish ponds. They are 5’ above ground, with a protective canal on the periphery as a flood/
sea defense.  This canal also serves as a capture facility for total pond harvesting.
Praedial larceny
Praedial larceny also presents a challenge both at the fingerling and adult stages.  There 
is need to strengthen the relevant laws and ensure their enforcement.  To a lesser degree, 
there is also competition from birds. Many creative solutions have been attempted, but the 
most effective deterrent has been the introduction of large eyes and scarecrows, strategically 
located around the periphery of the fish ponds.   
Adequate funding 
Adequate funding for the project was a major challenge as the banks were skeptical when 
told of the plan to grow freshwater fish in seawater.  This would not be quite as difficult if fresh 
water aquaculture was proposed. Funding agencies also preferred to work with cooperatives 
or associations.  Traditionally, research and development activity depend to a large extent 
| 383
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
on grant funding. Unfortunately, due to the global economic dilemma, such funding sources 
have suffered drastic contraction. It is hoped that the successes of SNAPPER will encourage 
government’s participation towards establishing a national aquaculture sector. 
Background to the Invention
The present invention relates to the employment of new techniques in the acclimatization 
of the freshwater fish (tilapia). Through a structural configuration and manipulation, the 
processes enabled 15-day tilapia fry to be transferred to full strength seawater, resulting in 
their ability to drastically reduce chances of mortality.  The invention is based, not only on 
concepts developed previously, but also on researcher observations.
Based on the fact that seawater was the only water in abundance, primary assumptions 
were made and subsequent assumptions evaluated.  These evaluations and successes resulted 
in a more resolute approach to experimentation.
The initial evaluations entailed experimenting with species of tilapia (namely O. 
mossambicus & O. niloticus).  The inventor was able to test the efficacy of assumptions on 
two selected species cross between O. mossambicus and O. niloticus, on a research farm 
in Conaree, St Kitts, West Indies.
Salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen and the maintenance of a pH of between 6.5 
and 7.5 were continuously monitored.  Acclimatization was the most problematic hurdle 
as challenges in the research to determine a suitable stage of commencement, and all the 
other factors that had to be solved.  At seven years into the project cycle, acceptable success 
began to emerge.  In year nine, a reliable and proven acclimatization process was perfected. 
This is now known as ‘trickle acclimatization’.
The Jamaica red snapper was the fingerling of choice. This invention involves the 
acclimatization of a cross between O. mossambicus and O. niloticus, for use on islands 
where suitable freshwater resources are limited. 
Project Objectives 
The main objectives of the project were to:
• develop an appropriate technological procedure for small island states aquaculture 
development, where natural freshwater supply is limited or non-existent;
• establish the shortest time frame for acclimatization;
• minimize the mortality rate in the conversion process and
• encourage reproduction and satisfactory growth in seawater. 
384 |
A Method for Growing Tilapia in Atlantic Seawater in St Kitts
Project Start-Up and Challenges
The following is the approach to implementation that was used in St Kitts:
• Lining up the ponds in the traditional wind flow in order to reduce energy 
consumption for aeration purposes. 
• Ensuring that ponds were above ground level, in order to counter hurricane flooding. 
Five ponds 100’ x 25’ x 4’ were lined with the thick non-leaching polyurethane 
plastic (geo membrane). The lining was laid seamless by tucking the corners up 
and tacking the material when the sun was hot, on a frame, then backfilling to the 
required height.  
• Piping was the next challenge. Initially the Atlantic feed was difficult to stabilize, 
but a 4’ cast iron sleeve with a 2”schedule 40-PVC pipe threaded into it proved to be 
successful.  A foot valve and strainer were attached to the end, which was cleaned 
regularly, due to seaweed and sand.  At 150’ from foot valve to draft pump, priming 
was problematic, but solutions were found. One and a half miles of pipe were laid 
for freshwater, saltwater, groundwater, and included a 4” manifold reduced to 2” 
and then to ½” for aeration distribution.  
In the third year of the project, saltwater research began.  Expertise from universities in 
Taiwan, Norway and the SKN local fisheries department advised that the level of tolerance 
to be expected should be 50/50 or at most 60/40, the greater being seawater.  
There were massive fish kills on numerous occasions, due to excessive algal growth (green 
water culture constituted the first experiment), heat during June–August, and excessive 
salinity.  Each of these problems had to be solved as they occurred.  Water quality, pH levels, 
temperature and other measurements were also monitored and addressed.  The salinity 
increased which resulted in ‘corned fish’ due to topping up the ponds with Atlantic sea water. 
The continuous evaporation by wind and sun removed the fresh water, resulting in increased 
salt levels. The heat problem was easy to solve. Partial shade using shade cloth reduced 
high temperatures and a continuous flow of water, (the flow-through system) addressed 
salinity, pH, aeration and temperature. A return path through the sand under the ponds 
and back to ground water, addressed the environmental problem.  Contamination of the 
reef and reef life was also avoided.  As a plan ‘B’, a powerful Rotron Regenorative blower 
which powers eight air stone ponds is used on windless days.  
Acclimatization was the biggest research problem; to determine commencement 
acclimatization stage, and all the other associated factors that had to be solved.  It is now 
ten years into the project cycle with acceptable success, except for petty larceny of fish and 
visits from fishing birds.  The bird problem has been solved with dogs on pond long length 
| 385
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
guide wires and anti-predator piano wire covering the area at 6” apart. The following details 
patent application information, which describes the SNAPPER process and claims. 
Summary of Activities
This invention relates to a trickle regime of one part per thousand of seawater over 14 days 
with tilapia cross (O. mossambicus and O. niloticus) fry 9–14 days old, and fed a powdered 
tilapia fry feed at the rate of one percent of body weight, every two hours for 14 days, or the 
encouragement of a suitable algal growth in the nursery pond. 
Other objects and features of the present invention include piggy-backing during the sex-
reversal process whereby sex-reversal and ‘trickle acclimatization’ can be a simultaneous 
procedure. Two methods of doing this are now described.
Example 1
Five hundred tilapia fry were selected from a freshwater brood pond at two to nine days 
and transferred to an algae rich pond.  After seven days, the trickle acclimatization process 
begins and continues for 14 days.  When the salinity level of the conversion pond and the 
pumped-in seawater synchronize, the fry are moved to a flow-through holding pond and 
then allowed to grow to fingerling size for final sexing.
Example 2 
The protocol of Example 1 was repeated with the inclusion of sex reversal feed. Five 
hundred fry were selected from a freshwater brood pond at two to nine days and transferred 
to a clear seawater pond.  Simultaneously, trickle acclimatization and sex-reversal (feed 
at a ratio of one part sex-reversal formula to nine parts regular powdered tilapia pellets, 
are fed at one percent of body weight every two hours) were done. After 14 days, the 
trickle acclimatization process is subjected to a salinity test.  When the salinity level of the 
conversion pond and the pumped in seawater are synchronized, the fry is moved to a flow-
through holding pond and they are then allowed to grow to fingerling size for final sexing.
Evaluations with Jamaica red snapper cross between O. mossambicus and O. niloticus 
have revealed positive results, including good colour, good appetite and brisk swimming 
movement.  
The results of evaluations of the application of sex-reversal feed in the process, revealed 
no significant difference in the adaptability of the fry to full strength seawater. 
It should also be noted that although the growth rate could be considered slower in 
seawater, and fry production somewhat less, the results were largely positive. 
386 |
A Method for Growing Tilapia in Atlantic Seawater in St Kitts
Patent Application
Below is an extract of the Patent application of the invention.
Method of Growing Tilapia in Full Strength Atlantic Seawater in St Kitts
The St Kitts and Nevis Aquaculture Pilot Project & Environmental Research (SNAPPER)
(First Published March 03/04/06)
Abstract
Small islands with no rivers, running streams, freshwater ponds or clay, have always had to 
forego initiatives to develop aquaculture (fish farming). With the rapid general depletion of 
fish in the Caribbean, and St Kitts in particular, the island was forced to import fish for their 
growing tourism industry, as well as domestic consumption.  It was, therefore, critical to 
develop appropriate technology which facilitated the use of available seawater. In addition, 
the system aids replication.  As a result, the inventor developed a system which is called ‘trickle 
acclimatization’. This system is applied during two processes namely, during (a) sex-reversal 
or (b) mixed sex acclimatization.  This included basic management of factors such as pH, 
dissolved oxygen, temperature and salinity. After grow-out, the fish was able to reproduce in 
seawater, albeit at a general reduction rate of 20 percent.  
This application was presented as a primary document for a patent search and processing.
Inventor: Barrington E. O. Brown Ph.D.  (St Kitts, West Indies) 
 
Assignee: The St Kitts and Nevis Aquaculture Pilot Project & Environmental Research 
(SNAPPER)
Appl. No.: XXXXXXXXXXXX
Filed: March 2011
Current U.S. Class:
Current International Class: 
Field of Search: International
| 387
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
Claims
1. What is claimed?
2. A method of “trickle acclimatization” to full strength seawater of the Jamaica Red 
Snapper (O. mossambicus and O. niloticus).
3. A method for increasing the rate of survival and commercial growth   
4. Methods of ensuring commercial reproduction in seawater 
Areas of Analytic Focus
• the acclimatization of a cross between O. mossambicus and O. niloticus, for 
application on islands where limited suitable freshwater resources exists.
• appropriate technological procedure for small island states aquaculture development, 
where natural freshwater supply is limited or non-existent.
• to provide the shortest time frame for acclimatization
• to minimize the mortality rate in the conversion process
• to encourage reproduction in seawater. 
Sharing Experiences Around the Region
In the CARICOM region, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, and Guyana have developed 
significant freshwater tilapia farms and have expressed interest in the developments. 
For general Aquaculture Technical assistance, arrangements can be made through each 
country’s Ministry of Agriculture, or Department of Marine Resources, or  the Department 
of Marine Resources in the Federation of St. Kitts and Nevis, through the St Kitts and Nevis 
Aquaculture Pilot Project which is available for any follow-up that you may require. The 
author’s contact information is included in this chapter.
SNAPPER would be prepared to share experiences with anyone who is interested. 
CONCLUSION
The foregoing discussion was presented for both traditional freshwater aquaculture 
aspirants, as well as for those persons who live in countries or islands with only seawater. 
The saltwater technology and processes are unusual with attendant drawbacks, but possible. 
It is presented here as an alternative to traditional inland aquaculture systems. 
388 |
A Method for Growing Tilapia in Atlantic Seawater in St Kitts
Both approaches require basic knowledge and a serious commitment to routine attention. 
However, a disciplined approach ensures predictable results.  An attachment to a working 
farm or advice from a knowledgeable person is advised before starting a project.
The Aquaculture industry has grown by leaps and bounds over the past ten years and 
is poised to increase faster as the depletion of marine fish escalates.  A proper research of 
the local market would be a prerequisite to develop a market-driven approach to planned 
production; this will help producers to match growth with local demand.  
The SOFRECO consulting team observed that, ‘currently, fishing is not attractive to the 
younger generation, but Aquaculture however, may show business qualities which the next 
generation may be attracted by.’ It was further observed, that,‘a higher domestic supply of 
seafood would obviously create competition’.  However, it is predicted that the consumption 
of seafood would increase with a higher quality supply of marine fish, and this could possibly 
push down prices of freshwater fish fillet imports, which could eventually lead to these fish 
fillets being more competitive against imported chicken broilers.  Whether this will actually 
materialize or not remains to be seen.  It was further thought that freshwater or farmed fish 
was likely to become more important.  
Aquaculture contribution to food security, as a protein source worldwide was also 
examined, with the opinion offered that unlike its current status, farmed fish could be 
produced more cheaply than other animal proteins. The team also felt that: ‘The question 
however is: can freshwater fish be sold at the same profit margins as chicken broiler?’ Only 
time will tell!
| 389
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean – Volume 2
SUGGESTED READINGS
Baker, J. 1988. Simply Fish. London: Faber & Faber. 
Brown, B.  2006. Growing Tilapia in Atlantic seawater in St Kitts. Gripsland
Chapman, F.A. 1992. Culture	of	Hybrid	Tilapia:	A	Reference	Profile. University of Florida, 
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.
Cook, J. 2007. Pest	Fish	Profiles	–	Oreochromis	Mossambicus. Australian Centre Tropical 
Freshwater Research.
Eschmeyer, W.N. 2007. Genera Summary: Tilapia. Catalog of Fish: California Academy 
of 11 Sciences. FishBase Database. 
Murray, P.A. 2014. AQUACULTURE – New Directions for Caribbean Regional Fisheries 
Mechanism (CRFM).  
Rosencrans, J. 2003. Tilapia is a Farmed Fish of Biblical Fame. The Cincinnati Post. (E.7.
 Fisheries 2 Management and Development), CRFM Secretariat.
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2013. Fisheries and Aquaculture Department 
Statistics.  http://www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/en. 
390 |
Figure 10.4: Shade house with tomato crops, Dekade, Haiti
Figure 10.5: Shade house with cabbage crops, Makaya, Haiti
| 391
CHAPTER TEN
Figure 10.6A: Greenhouse with vertical hydroponics system
Figure 10.6B: Outdoor irrigation controller
392 |
Figure 10.10:  XPSM 300 designed by S. LaPlace (aeroponics/nutrient film 
technique and ebb flow)
Figure 10.11:  Sweet Bell Pepper and Cucumber 2011
| 393
Figure 10.12: Hydroponics system used Figure 10.13: Initial system run with 
by students and faculty for on-going 17 different crops
research in crop production 
Figure 10.14: Strawberries with limited phosphorus
394 |
Figure 10.15: Eggplants blooming Figure 10.16: Lettuce in hydroponics 
in 2008
Figure 10.17: Kentucky String Beans in 2012
| 395
Figure 10.18: Cabbage 2009
Figure 10.19: Yellow Bell Peppers in 2013
396 |
Figure 10.20: Student observing plant Figure 10.21: Detail of recent price-saving 
growth in hydroponic system at CFBC adaptation of hydroponic system using 
Plant Research Facility 5-gallon buckets to contain nutrient 
solution.
Figure 10.22:  Students at CFBC sowing seeds in a hydroponics system
| 397
Figure 10.23: Lettuce under 30 percent Figure 10.24: Lettuce under 50 percent 
shade @ 23days in hydroponics system shade @ 23 days in hydroponics system
Figure 10.25: Iceberg lettuce under Figure 10.26: Iceberg lettuce under 50 
30 percent shade @ 38days in percent shade @ 38days in hydroponics 
hydroponics system system
398 |
Figure 10.27:  CFBC students preparing Figure 10.28:  CFBC shade house design 
organoponics planting trays with with hydroponics to the right and 
plastic lining organoponics to the left
Figure 10.30: CFBC students transplanting seedlings from hydroponic to 
organoponic planting trays
| 399
Figure 11.2: Fruit trees planted on hillside terracing with forest 
species at the St. Michael’s Station, Tacarigua, Trinidad
Figure 11.3: Fruit trees (mango) and forest species used for soil 
erosion control
400 |
CHAPTER ELEVEN
Figure 11.4: A mix of coconut, fruit trees and forest species planted 
on a sloping hillside
Figure 11.5: Caribbean pine grown with other fruit trees
| 401
Figure 11.6: Taunga system in which cocoa and bananas are 
planted with forest species (cedar and mahogany)
Figure 11.7: Breadfruit intercropped with Caribbean pine
402 |
Figure 11.8: Livestock (cattle farming) under coconut trees in Cocal, Trinidad
Figure 11.9: Aquaculture with Figure 11.10: Tilapia fishes 
food crops (bananas and plantain) grown in agroforestry system 
and forest species (cedar). The are an important and healthy 
agroforestry system belongs to Mr. food source
Jagessar Dan of Rio Claro, Trinidad.
| 403
Figure 12.1:  Pond at SNAPPER project
Figure 12.2:  Tilapia Feeding
404 |
CHAPTER TWELVE
Figure 12.3:  Demand Feeder System
Figure 12.4:  Jamaica Red Snapper (Tilapia Hybrid)
| 405
Figure 12.5:  Typical Tilapia Farm Tour
Figure 12.6:  Snapper Project Coordinator 
Conducting Farm Tour
Figure 12.7: Dr 
Barrington Brown (L) 
Project Coordinator 
(SNAPPER) and Mr 
Samuel Heyliger, Senior 
Fisheries Officer, 
Department of Marine 
Resources, St Kitts 
406 |
Notes on Contributors
Alexandre, Gisele (Ph.D.)
Dr. Gisele Alexandre is a research engineer in animal husbandry and tropical farming 
systems. She studies creole small ruminants using different scales (animal, product, farming 
system, food chain). Diverse disciplines are integrated in her approach: reproduction control, 
pasture management, feeding strategies and meat quality. She analyzes the diversity, 
the productivity and the territorial and societal functions of livestock. G. Alexandre has 
performed many missions of education (academic and vocational training) and often 
interacts with stakeholders in the French Antilles (breeder’s unions or Natural Parks) but 
also elsewhere in the Caribbean (Cuba, Haiti, Mexico). As a member of the International 
Goat Association, and having lead numerous expert missions in the Caribbean and Latin 
America, she brings a critical glance at the strengths and the constraints in tropical areas. 
More specifically, she investigates the multi-functional features of livestock farming in these 
territories. She is taking part of a team project upon agroecological engineering adapted to 
tropical agro ecosystems. 
Brown, Barrington (Ph.D.)
Dr. Barrington Brown (Ph.D. Public Administration in Development) is a Project 
Development Specialist.  He is currently the lead Researcher and Project Coordinator for 
the St. Kitts & Nevis Aquaculture Pilot Project and Environmental Research (SNAPPER). 
He has previously been a tutor and lecturer in Organizational Structure and Behaviour, 
Human Resource Management, and Compensation Management at the University of the 
West Indies Campus in St. Kitts. Previously, Dr. Brown was a founding member of the 
Caribbean Advisory and Professional Services Team, which served all CARICOM Countries, 
through project development, implementation and training consultations. He also served 
the Government of Jamaica as a Director of the Social Development Commission, and 
Manager of the National Community Economic Organization.    
| 421
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
Atwell, Melissa (M.Phil.)
Ms. Melissa Atwell obtained her B.Sc. Environmental Management and an M.Phil. 
in Geography at The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago. 
She is a member of the Soil Science Society of America, Crops Science Society of America 
and the Agronomy Society of America. Her research interests are in the area of soil-plant 
interactions, ecosystem services and geo-physical imaging. She attended several conferences 
at which oral and poster presentations were made on environmental, ecological and 
agricultural issues related to wetlands. She co-authored several peer-reviewed articles in 
the field of wetland soils, soil physics and precision agriculture. She is currently a Ph.D. 
candidate conducting further research on the ecosystem services provided by tropical 
savannahs as influenced by land-use.
Diman, Jean-Louis (Ph.D.)
Dr. Jean-Louis Diman, is an agro-economist. He is specialized in the agricultural 
Caribbean analyses. He holds a post-graduate degree (Magister ‘Caribbean Agricultural 
Development’). He currently studies farming systems from a systemic approach and 
implements Research and Development processes (more commonly labeled Research-
Action) in the Great Caribbean. He worked in Cuba, in the Brazilian Amazon, the Dominican 
Republic, Haiti, Guadeloupe, Martinique and the OECS. His work emphasizes issues on 
agrarian territorial diagnosis and scrutinizes organizational food chains. He highlights 
technical and economic frames of reference and contributes to modeling the functioning of 
farms and the decision making of farmers. He is fully involved in agricultural advising and 
academic or vocational training. At the crossroads of research (University of French Antilles 
& Guiana, French National Institute for Agronomic Research: INRA, Cuba’s agricultural 
research institutes...) and public action (agricultural organizations, development, 
management of projects, ministries and public services in charge of agriculture...), Jean-
Louis Diman joined INRA in 2000.  Actually the research team he belongs to since 2005 is 
mainly concerned with the conception and assessment of innovations in farming systems.
Dipchansingh, Denny (B.Sc.)
Mr. Denny Dipchansingh, is an Assistant Conservator of Forests in the Forestry Division 
in Trinidad and Tobago. He is currently the Deputy Project Director of the Northern Range 
Reforestation Project. Mr. Dipchansingh has twenty years experience in the Forestry Division 
with a wide knowledge on forest management, forest governance, planning and research. 
He is the Head of the Community Forestry Unit and The Nariva Swamp Management Unit 
422 |
Notes on Contributors
both currently involved in providing knowledge in sustainable land management practices 
including agroforestry. Mr. Dipchansingh also has special interests in forest entomology 
and forest resource  management.
Eudoxie, Gaius (Ph.D.)
Dr. Gaius Eudoxie is a Lecturer of soil fertility and organic matter management in 
the Department of Food Production, UWI, St. Augustine campus in Trinidad. Graduate 
with a PhD in soil science in 2003 and continued researching in the area of sustainable 
soil managements and crop nutrition. Focus has remained on improving soil fertility 
management practices in SIDS and investigating the effects of improved crop nutrition on 
harvest quality. He has a keen interest in teaching both to students and students at heart 
(farmers) and continues to devote  much of his time to outreach and education, especially 
in promoting to use of soil and plant diagnostic tools and techniques.
Fanchone, Audrey (Ph.D.)
Dr. Audrey Fanchone is a research engineer in animal husbandry and tropical farming 
systems. After a PhD in 2009 prepared at the Zootechnical Research Unit of INRA Antilles 
Guyane on the topic of “comparison of intake and digestion of sheep fed with green forage 
indoor and at pasture” and a post-doctorate at the Mixed Research Unit on Herbivores 
of INRA Clermont-Ferrand Theix on the topic of “Effects of nitrogen underfeeding and 
energy source on nitrogen ruminal metabolism, digestion, and nitrogen partitioning in 
dairy cows”, Audrey Fanchone integrates the Zootechnical Research Unit at INRA Antilles 
Guyane as a Research engineer. His research focuses on the design and evaluation of tropical 
farming systems with main object the specialized farming systems and alternative farming 
systems. His analytical tools are (i) surveys on farms, (ii) monitoring of operations, (iii) the 
development of analytical experiments, and (iv) modeling.
Ganpat, Wayne (Ph.D.)
Dr. Wayne Ganpat (Ph.D. Agricultural Extension) is a Caribbean extension professional. 
Presently, he is a Lecturer in Agricultural Extension and Communications at the University 
of the West Indies (UWI), St Augustine, Trinidad and teaches courses at both the 
undergraduate and graduate levels. Prior to joining the UWI, he worked as an Extension 
officer in the Government extension service for over 20 years and left as the Deputy Director 
of Extension services. He has worked as a consultant for Governments in most Caribbean 
countries over the last twenty years doing work both in Extension and Communications.
| 423
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
Isaac, Wendy-Ann (Ph.D.)
Dr. Wendy-Ann Isaac is a Lecturer in Crop Production/Protection, The University of the 
West Indies (UWI), St. Augustine Campus, Trinidad and Tobago.  Dr. Isaac received her 
BSc. MSc., and Ph.D. degrees from the UWI, St. Augustine and M.Appl.Sci. in Agronomy 
from Lincoln University, New Zealand.  Her research interests include Sustainable crop 
production systems and Participatory action research techniques with small farmers.  She 
has worked with Fairtrade banana small farmers in St. Vincent and The Grenadines using 
the Participatory Research methods as part of her PhD. studies.  She has authored and co-
authored papers and chapters on these topics, which have been published in both regional 
and international peer-reviewed journals and also co-edited a book on Sustainable Food 
Production Practices in the Caribbean.
Khan, Ayub (Ph.D.)
Dr. Ayub Khan is a Senior Lecturer in Plant Science (Entomology/Crop Protection), 
The University of the West Indies (UWI), St. Augustine Campus, Trinidad and Tobago. Dr. 
Khan received his BSc. and Ph.D. degrees from UWI, St. Augustine. His research interests 
are biological control of tropical insect pests, entomopathogenic fungi as biological control 
agents and pesticide application technology.
Lallo, Cicero (M.Phil.)
Mr. Cicero Lallo is a lecturer in Animal Science, The University of the West Indies 
(UWI), St. Augustine Campus, Trinidad and Tobago. Mr. Lallo received his BSc. and M.Sc. 
degrees from UWI, St. Augustine. His research interest are production of ducks, pigs and 
small ruminants, particularly the utilization of non-conventional feed ingredients, poultry 
broilers & ducks production and small ruminant production.
LaPlace, Stuart (B.Sc.)
Mr. Stuart LaPlace is an Innovator and a Hydroponics Specialist. Currently, he is a 
Lecturer in Biology and Non Traditional Agricultural Systems (Hydroponics) at the Clarence 
Fitzroy Bryant College (CFBC) for the last six (6) years. In addition to his classes, Mr. LaPlace 
conducts research in Hydroponics and has trained both students and agriculturalists in this 
field as well as designed and implemented a Hydroponics system on the CFBC campus. He 
has several international publications which includes CXC-CAPE UNIT 1 & UNIT 2 Study 
Guides in Biology which he co-authored and is the author of Non-traditional Agricultural 
System (Hydroponics) and Biology Practical. Mr. LaPlace currently serves as an Examiner 
424 |
Notes on Contributors
in Biology for CXC-CAPE and has consulted and coordinated many projects in Innovation 
and Hydroponics Technology. 
Maharaj, Rohanie (Ph.D.)
Dr. Rohanie Maharaj is a Ph.D. graduate in Food Science and Technology from Université 
Laval in Canada. Her research specialization is in the area of Postharvest Biology and 
Technology of tropical fruits and vegetables.  At the University of Trinidad and Tobago 
(UTT), she is an Associate Professor in Biosciences, Agriculture and Food Technologies 
(BAFT) and Programme Leader for the B.Sc. Diploma and Certificate programmes in Food 
Technology.  She is a certified evaluator for the Accreditation Council of Trinidad and Tobago, 
Chair of the Food and Beverage Industry Development Committee and currently serves on a 
number of internal UTT committees.  Dr. Maharaj has over 30 years of experience working 
in Academia and Industry including 14 years in Industry leading Quality and Reliability. 
In 2013, she received the NIHERST award for excellence in Science and Technology. She 
has published in reputable journals in Food and Agriculture and in the areas of postharvest 
storage technology of Caribbean exotic crops. She has co-authored 2 books by CRC Press, 
along with several book chapters.
Meehan, Kevin (Ph.D.)
Dr. Kevin Meehan (Ph.D., Comparative Literature) is professor of English and director the 
Haitian Studies Project at the University of Central Florida.  He is the author of People Get 
Ready: African American and Caribbean Cultural Exchange (University Press of Mississippi, 
2009) and more than twenty peer-reviewed articles exploring cultural decolonization in 
the Caribbean and elsewhere.  Dr. Meehan also studies rural development and was funded 
by the National Science Foundation to investigate the impact of mobile devices on relief 
efforts following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.  In 2012, he was Visiting Professor at the 
Clarence Fitzroy Bryant College in St. Kitts and worked on agriculture studies curriculum 
development and public outreach projects in sustainable gardening.  Since 2009, he has 
co-directed the UCF President’s Scholars program that each summer brings UCF students 
to work on environment-oriented service learning projects with local students, faculty, and 
community groups in St. Kitts and Nevis.
Mohammed, Majeed (Ph.D.)
Dr. Majeed Mohammed is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Food Production, 
Faculty of Food and Agriculture, The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine Campus. 
| 425
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
Naraine, Leighton (Ph.D.)
Dr. Leighton Naraine (Ph.D. Management) is community development professional who 
specializes in Urban and Regional Planning, Public Policy, and Governance.  Presently, 
he is the Director of Employee and Programme Development at the Clarence Fitzroy 
Bryant College (CFBC), St. Kitts-Nevis, where he also lectures in Agricultural Studies, 
Environmental Science, Geography, and Teacher Education.  Prior to joining the CFBC, he 
was a planner in California.  He also conceptualizes national, regional, and international 
research and development projects as adaptation strategies to climate change, writes 
proposals, and implements them.
O’Connor, Clare (Ph.D.)
Dr. Clare Bowen-O’Connor (Ph.D. Agronomy) is an Environmental Plant Physiologist. 
Currently, she is a Lecturer in Agricultural Studies at the Clarence Fitzroy Bryant College 
(CFBC), Basseterre, St. Kitts and Nevis. Her training encompasses woody plant tissue 
culture, plant stress physiology, and terrestrial ecology. Her research focus is sustainable 
agriculture and forest conservation on island landscapes.  She has worked as an Agricultural 
Officer at the Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute and a Lecturer in 
Food Production at the University of the West Indies, St Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago. 
Ozier-Lafontaine, Harry (Ph.D.)
Dr. Harry Ozier-Lafontaine is an agronomist and a Senior Scientist at the French 
National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA). He is the Regional Head of Inra 
Centre in the Caribbean. His field of research concerns the analysis and modeling of multi-
species cropping systems (mixed cropping, agroforestry, etc.), the design and assessment 
of ecologically intensive agriculture in tropical farming systems (Guadeloupe, Martinique, 
Cuba, Guiana, Amazonia, and Central America). He particularly addresses topics including: 
biological regulation and integrated pest management, multi criteria evaluation of the 
contribution of farming systems to sustainable development, design and evaluation of 
systems environmentally innovative. He also contributes, through various initiatives, to 
the development of agricultural science in their agro-ecological dimension. 
Pierre, Amenold (M.Sc.)
Mr. Amenold (M. Sc. in Rural Development) is presently a lecturer and the agronomy 
dean at the University Nouvelle Grand’Anse (UNOGA), Jérémie, Haiti. Prior to working with 
UNOGA, he worked as an academic consultant at University of Fondwa (UNIF), Leogane, 
426 |
Notes on Contributors
Haiti. He has also worked in an investigative project with colleagues of University of Central 
Florida (UCF), on “Assessment of Current and Potential Uses of Mobile Technology for 
Haitian Relief and Development Effort”, financed by the National Science Foundation 
(NSF).  Mr. Pierre has a ten years’ experience in the development work managing NGO’s 
development project in rural Haiti, and building capacities for rural CBO’s and local 
Authorities.
Rajack-Talley, Ann (PhD.)
Dr. Theresa Ann Rajack-Talley earned a BSc. in Agriculture Science and an MPhil. in 
Extension from the University of the West Indies. She received a Fulbright scholarship and 
pursued a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Kentucky.  She is currently an Associate 
Professor and former Chair in the Department of Pan African Studies at the University of 
Louisville, Kentucky, USA. Her research is based throughout the Caribbean, West Africa 
and the US. She has over 20 years research experience in the areas of social inequality and 
poverty, agricultural sectoral analysis,  small family farming systems, women in agriculture, 
Caribbean food production, food security and sustainable development, program evaluation, 
policy development, rural and agrarian transformation, quantitative and qualitative research 
design. She has consulted with several Caribbean regional and international development 
institutions and on US- based research grants. 
Ramdwar, Marcus N.A. (Ph.D.)
Dr. Marcus N.A. Ramdwar is an Assistant Professor at the Eastern Caribbean Institute 
of Agriculture and Forestry at the University of Trinidad and Tobago within the Biosciences 
Agriculture & Food Technology Unit of the University of Trinidad and Tobago. He is 
holder of a Bachelor of Science Agriculture (General) First Class Honours and a Master 
of Philosophy in Crop Science from the University of the West Indies. He obtained his 
Ph.D. in Agriculture from the University of Trinidad and Tobago. He has just over twelve 
years educating individuals in the discipline of Agriculture and food related sciences. His 
current research interests are within the areas of crop science, agricultural education and 
agricultural extension.
Ramnarine, Ravindra (Ph.D.)
Dr. Ravindra Ramnarine (Ph.D. Soil Science) is a Lecturer in Soil Science and Natural 
Resource Management at The University of the West Indies (UWI), St. Augustine, Trinidad 
and Tobago.  His teaching and research revolve around his area of expertise: soil-plant 
relationships, soil management, and soil fertility. He also has special interest in forest soils, 
| 427
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
sustainable agroforestry practices, and the restoration of degraded lands. Dr. Ramnarine was 
previously employed as an Agricultural Officer and Ag. Soil Scientist in the Government’s 
Research Division (7 years), but also provided expert knowledge to both agriculture and 
agroforestry practitioners.
Siew, Narendra (M.Sc.)
Mr. Narendra Siew is an Senior Instructor at the University of Trinidad and Tobago, 
Eastern Caribbean Institute of Agriculture and Forestry (ECIAF)) Campus, within the 
Biosciences Agriculture & Food Technology Unit. His tertiary level education started at 
ECIAF where he read for the Diploma in the Science and Practice of Agriculture, Honours. 
He then continued at the University of the West Indies, St. Augustine and is holder of a 
Bachelor of Science Agriculture (General) First Class Honours and a Master of Science in 
Animal Science, Distinction. He is involved in teaching and research at the tertiary level for 
approximately ten years.  His current research interests lie in the field of animal nutrition 
and reproductive management.
St. Martin, Chaney (Ph.D.)
Dr. Chaney C.G. St. Martin graduated as the Valedictorian of Faculty of Science and 
Agriculture, Class of 2007 with a BSc. Agriculture General (First Class Honours). He has a 
Ph.D. in Crop Science with High Commendation from the University of the West Indies and 
is interested in protected agriculture technology, composting, and statistical modeling and 
evaluation of physical and biological processes, which result in improved plant nutrition 
and performance, disease suppression, and soil fertility.
Valet, Serge (Ph.D.)
Dr. Serge Valet is a soil scientist specialized in hydropedology and ecology. He has worked 
extensively on Saharan and tropical Africa production systems. His interest focused on 
multi-species and multi-storied systems and water relations of natural and cultivated under 
rainfed and irrigated systems. Former research professor and engineer chief of projects at 
Centre for International Cooperation in Agronomic Research for Development (CIRAD, 
France), now retired, he currently runs a consulting firm PASSERELLES  9 rue du Bât 
d’Argent  69001 Lyon - France - Tél : 0478391266, valet.serge2@wanadoo.fr.
428 |
Notes on Contributors
Webster, Nicole (Ph.D.)
Dr. Nicole Webster is an Associate Professor in Agricultural and Extension Education. 
She holds a B.Sc. from the University of Florida, and her M.Sc. and Ph.D. from Michagan 
State University.   Her research interests are in civic engagement, social change, service 
learning, positive youth development and minority and at-risk youth.  Her research focuses 
on understanding the impact of service learning experiences on youth and young adults in 
school and community-based settings.  She emphasizes service learning and outreach as 
an intervention tool for minority youth in marginalized low-income communities.
Wuddivira, Mark (Ph.D.) 
Dr. Mark Wuddivira is a Senior Lecturer in Soil Science (Soil Physics) at the University of 
the West Indies (UWI), St. Augustine Campus, Trinidad and Tobago. Dr. Wuddivira obtained 
his B.Sc. General Agriculture and M.Sc. Soil Science from Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, 
Nigeria, and Ph.D. Soil Science from the UWI. He is a member of the Soil Science Society 
of America and an executive member of the Caribbean Academy of Sciences, Trinidad and 
Tobago Chapter. His research interests are in the area of soil water management, intense 
tropical rainfall effects on soil physical behaviour, soil water characteristic in tropical 
ecosystems, and soil geophysical imaging using electromagnetic induction. He has co-
authored several peer-reviewed articles in respectable journals. 
 
| 429

Index
Absorption: pollution by, 212 Agroecological engineering:   
Acclimation: rooting and, 314-315 definition of, 265-266
Ackee: pest repellent properties of, 157 Agroecological transition: 
Adsorption: definition of, 213  in family farm in Cuba, 276-277
Advocacy: for farming, 29 Agroforestry: 
Agricultural data: Caribbean, 7-8, 10-11  benefits of, 368-378;  
Agricultural diversification:  in the Caribbean, 353-356; 
 definition of, 306;  concept of, 355-356; 
 and climate change, 308-309;  and food security, 376-377;  
 and development of small farms, 5;  history of, 356-357; 
evaluation of, 307-308;  policy and legislation, 373-374, 376; 
 and non-traditional systems, 303-352; systems, 360-362; 
 in St Kitts, 307-308  taungya system of, 365
Agricultural environmental management Agro-industry: and Caribbean economies, 12
(AEM): and food security, 209 Agro-processing: non-traditional products, 320
Agricultural Incentive Programme: Agrosilvicultural: 
 in T&T, 376  system of agroforestry, 360, 362
Agricultural organizations:    Agrosilvopastoral: 
and small farmers, 6  system of agroforestry, 360, 367-368
Agricultural Professional Development Agrosystems: ES in, 270; OM in, 278
Programme (APDP):    Air pollution: livestock production and, 229-30
in Trinidad & Tobago, 41 Alexander, Giselle, 421
Agricultural research: PRD approach to, 28 Algal growth: nutrient contamination and, 224
Agricultural Resource Management Programme: Alley cropping: definition of, 362-363
 and greenhouse farming in St Kitts, 316-317 Amaranthus: pest repellent properties of, 164
Agricultural run-off: and NPS, 210 Animal (Diseases and Importation)   
Agricultural sector: Act (T&T), 237
 employment in the, 10-11; Antigua: agroforestry in, 374
 promotion of the, 49 Antimicrobials: and water contamination, 227
Agricultural training: in the Caribbean, 40-42 Annatto: pest repellent properties of, 164
Agriculture: and ES, 263-264; Animal feeding: strategies, 279
 and employment in the Caribbean, 354; Animal to land ratio: in intensive systems, 220
and food safety in the Caribbean, 231-236; Animal manure: global production of, 221
 graduate programmes in, 41; Animal production: 
 and the green revolution, 263-288;  small, 53-88; 
protected, 109-115, 219, 309, 316-319;  sustainability and, 219-240
 rural youth and Caribbean, 37-50; Animal waste: environmental protection and 
sustainable value chain framework in, 43-44; disposal of, 220, 221
 women in, 13, 4-26 Animal wildlife programme: in T&T, 276
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
Antigua: GARDC in, 42 Botulism: in ducks, 83
Application: site and reduction of pesticide Bougainvillea: pest repellent properties of, 164
contamination, 217 Breeder ducks: management of, 76
Aquaculture: Breeding stock management: 
 and agroforestry, 368;  in duck production, 76-79
 in the Caribbean, 380-389 British Royal Commission: 
Artificial brooding: of ducklings, 80  and diversification of agriculture, 5
Artificial incubation: in duck breeding, 78 Broiler production: 
Artificial insemination:  housing for, 219; 
 in livestock farming, 310  stocking densities for, 222
Ash: in pest management, 142-143 Broodiness, 79
Atlantic seawater: Brown, Barrington, 421
 Tilapia production in, 380-389 Brown stain disease:  
Atwell, Melissa, 422  in lettuce, 128
Buck: 
Backyard production: of ducks, 73  doe ratio: 
Bacterial leaf spot: in lettuce, 131  in rabbit breeding, 61
Bahamas, The: water supply in, 174 Buck teeth, 67
BANAD model: description of the, 285-288 Buffer zones: and reduction of pesticide 
Banana: contamination, 216
 De novo cropping system, 285-86; Business skills: in agriculture, 49
 farming systems, 285-288; 
 protection methods for, 148 Cabbage: pest control methods for, 145, 147
Banana farmers: Candling: of eggs, 78
 impact of the open market on, 26-27 Carbohydrates: in rabbit nutrition, 56-57
Banana weevil: natural control of, 152 Carbon dioxide emissions: 
Barbados: water supply in, 174  agroforestry and, 371-372; 
Basil: pest repellent properties of, 158  and air pollution, 229
Belize: water supply in, 174 Caribbean: agricultural data in the, 7-9; 
Berry leaf: pest repellent properties of, 158 agricultural training in the, 40-42; 
Best management practices (BMPs): agroforestry in the, 353-378; 
 cultural, 116-120; for monitoring  agro-industry in the, 12; 
environmental factors, 109-113  aquaculture in the, 380-389; 
Biodiversity:  food imports into the, 2; 
 family farms and the preservation of, 1  geography of the, 357-359; 
Biological control: of pests, 144-145  hydrological cycle, 172; 
Biological degradation, 212  rabbit diseases in the, 66-68; 
Biosecurity measures: in duck production, 82  rainfall in the, 171-172; 
Black pepper: pest repellent properties of, 158  rural youth and agriculture in the, 37-50; 
Blue water: definition, 179-180  tissue culture in the, 314-315; 
Bottom rot: in lettuce, 130-131  water management in the, 169-190
432 |
Index
Caribbean agriculture: Climate change: agricultural diversification 
 food safety in the, 231-236; and, 308-309; agroforestry and, 371-373; 
 IS in, 267, 273-274; and water, 170
 small scale farming in the, 11; Coccidiosis: in ducks, 84, 66
 women in, 2, 3, 13, 14-26 Cocoa: 
Caribbean Food and Nutrition Institute  post-harvest protection of, 148; 
(CFNI): research on agricultural  protection methods for, 148; 
diversification, 306  and shade trees, 362
Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism Coconut: protection methods for, 148
(CRFM): and aquaculture, 381 Codex Alimentarius Commission: and food 
CARICOM: safety, 236
 trends in agricultural trade, 304; Coffee: and shade trees, 362
aquaculture in, 380-389 Cold chain: and reduction of post harvesting 
Cash crops: and the plantation sector, 5 losses, 244, 247
Cashew: pest repellent properties of, 164 Colombia: Tosoloy farm in, 274-275
Cassava: Colour: insect control and, 155
 post-harvest protection of, 148; Commercial production: of ducks, 73, 75
 protection methods for, 146; Community farms: hydroponics and, 320
 storage of, 149 Companion planting: and insect control, 155
Castor oil: pest repellent properties of, 158 Conjunctivitis, 57
Cattle production: Conservation buffers, 363
 feedlot systems in, 219; Conservation of Wildlife Act (T&T), 237
 stocking densities for, 222 Conservational tillage: description of, 185
Central Farms: duck production on, 70-72 Conservation vegetable barriers: 
Change: youth as agents of, 38  description, 186
Chemical degradation: Consolidation: of peasant farms, 4-5
 pollution by, 212, 227-228 Contour farming: description, 186, 363
Chemical practices: in vegetable farming, 129 Corn: 
Chemistry, Food and Drugs Division (CFDD):  pest control methods for, 145, 147; 
and food safety in T&T, 236  storage of, 149
Chili pepper: pest repellent properties of, 159 Cover cropping: 
Christmas bush:  description of, 185: 
 pest repellent properties of, 159  and ES, 277-278
Chutney: manufacturing of, 258 Cowpea: pest control methods for, 145, 147
Citrus: Cowpea weevil: natural control of the, 154
 step-by-step farming system, 282, 283-284; Creole garden: system, 273-274
 protection methods for, 148 CRFM/JIICA Master Plan Study: and 
Clarence Fitzroy Bryant College (CFBC): aquaculture, 381
 and research in non-traditional agriculture, Crop diversification: agroforestry and, 377
303-304, 308-309, 321-350 ‘ Cropland: system of agroforestry, 366
Climate: and weather, 171-173 Crop-livestock integration: ES and 
| 433
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
Crop producers: women, 20 Disinfecting: growth substrates, 120
Crop production: NPS and, 210-211 Diversification: CARICOM and agricultural, 
Crop protection: methods of natural, 140-165 304-352
Crop rotation: Division of labour: gender and the, 20, 21
 description of, 186; in vegetable Domestic food system: women and, 2, 3, 23-24
production, 116 Dominica: 
Crop selection: in vegetable production, 116-117  agroforestry in, 374; 
Cuba: agroecological transition on family farm  water supply in, 174
in, 276-277 Downy mildew: in lettuce, 131-132
Cuban farmers: biological control methods Drainage system: and the management of 
used by, 144-145 waterlogging, 188
Cucumber: pest control methods for, 145, 147 Drainage water: recycling, 182
Culling: in rabbit breeding, 62 Drip irrigation, 184, 318
Cultural practices: in vegetable farming, 129 Duck production, 53, 68-88; 
Custard apple: pest repellent properties of, 157  nutrition in, 72-74
Ducks: 
Damping off: natural control of, 154  breeding stock management, 76-79; 
Dasheen:  breeds in the Caribbean, 68-70; 
 protection methods for, 146;  cholera in, 84; 
 storage of, 149  drake ratio in breeding, 76-77; 
Degradation: chemical, 212  marketing and processing, 85-86;
Demographic data: on small farmers, 7-8  nutrition and feeding of, 72-74 
Department of Agriculture: varietal trials by St  virus enteritis in; 84
Kitts’, 310 Ducklings: management of newly-hatched, 
De novo: 79-81
 banana cropping system, 285-86;  
 farm design, 282 Ecosystem services (ES): 
Department of Food and Production (St  in agrosystems, 270; 
Augustin): duck research by the, 70, 71  benefits of-264, 263; 
Design and Assessment of Innovative  cover crops for, 277-278; 
Sustainable Cropping Systems (DISC):  and livestock farming, 273-275; 
description of, 283  and MEA, 267-268; 
Diamondback moth: natural control of the,  and mixed crop systems, 270-271
149-150 Eddoe: storage of, 149
Diman, Jean-Louis, 422 Education: for youth, 48
Dipchansingh, Denny’ 422-423 Effluent: wastewater and the use of, 182-183
Disease monitoring: in vegetable production, Egg fertility: in duck breeding, 77
126-132, 140-143, 155 Egg production: 
Diseases:  lighting and, 77; 
 common duck, 84-85;  management, 77-78
 in lettuce, 130-132 Electrical conductivity: and measurement of 
substrate, 121
434 |
Index
Emancipation: and the development of small Farm to fork value chain: and food safety, 232
producers, 4 Farm managers: women, 21-22
Employment: Farm records, 86-88
 in agricultural sector, 10-11, 353-356 Farming systems: 
Enabling policies: Government, 50  de novo, 282-283, 285-286; redesigning, 
Enabling environment: in the sustainable value 281-289
chain framework, 44 Fanchone, Audrey, 423
Enslaved women: in agriculture, 15-16 Fat: in rabbit nutrition, 57
Enteric diseases: among rabbits, 65, 66 Feeding: strategies for animals, 279-281
Environment: Fertilizer: 
 agroforestry and the, 370;  negative impacts of, 217; 
 and food production, 209-240;  and soil nutrients, 216;
 GAP and the, 209; Fertilizer management: effective, 217-219
 and housing for rabbits, 63-64; Fever grass: pest repellent properties of, 159
 NSP and the, 210-240; Fibre: in rabbit nutrition, 65
 small producers and the, 13 Field pests: control of, 145-148
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Field scouting: and insect pests, 155
classification of pesticide toxicity, 213 Financing: recommendations for, 29
Establishment (1838-1860): Fish weed: pest repellent properties of, 164
 of peasant farms, 4 Fisheries Act, 1975 (T&T), 238
Eucalyptus: pest repellent properties of, 159 Feed sourcing and management: and water 
Eudoxie, Gaius, 423 management, 189
Evapo-transpiration: Feedlot systems: for cattle production, 219
 livestock production and, 223 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO): 
Excess water: management, 187-188  and small scale farming, 11, 12, 26; 
Experiential learning: in agriculture, 48  and women farmers, 26
Export: plantations sector and food, 5, 11 Food and Drug Act, 1960 (T&T): 
 and food safety, 236, 238
Faculty of Agriculture (UWI): research on Food and Drug Association (USA): 
agricultural diversification, 306  and food safety, 237
Fallow: improved, 364-365 Food imports: and food security, 2, 231
Family farms: Food production:
 characteristics of, 6-7;  and the environment, 209-240;
 and employment, 12;   global, 1-2, 231
 and global food production, 1-2; Food safety: 
 and the plantation system, 3;  in the Caribbean, 231-236; 
 and risk, 8-9;  and duck health, 81-82; 
 and sustainable development, 9-11;  hazards, 233-235; 
 women and, 2, 3-4. 13  international standards for, 235-236; 
 See also Domestic food system and Small regulations for, 236-238
producers
| 435
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
Food Safety Modernization Act (USA): and Goat weed: pest repellent properties of, 164
food safety, 237 Goats: feeds for, 280
Food security: Good agricultural practices (GAP): 
 AEM and, 209;  and the environment, 209; 
 agroforestry and, 376-379;  and food safety, 236
 definition of, 3, 231, 377; Good manufacturing practices (GMP): and 
 and importation of food, 2; food safety, 236
 and water, 170-171 Governance structure: in the sustainable value 
Food traceability systems, 238-239 chain framework, 44
Forestry Division of Trinidad and Tobago: and Government interventions: in agricultural 
community-based agroforestry, 375-376 development, 50
Fresh-cut technology: for mangoes, 257 Groundwater resources: 
Fresh produce: logistics and marketing of, 245-  in the Caribbean, 176-176
246 Graduate programmes: in agriculture, 41
Fresh water resources: Grassroots efforts: in youth development, 40
 livestock production and depletion of, 223; Green water: definition of, 180
microbial contamination of, 226. Green revolution: agriculture and the, 264
 See also Ground water and Surface water Greenhouse: 
Fruit crops:  description of a, 107; 
 insect control in, 152-154;  models, 316-319; 
 reducing losses in post-harvesting of, 243  farming in St Kitts, 316
Fruit flies: natural control of, 153 Grenada: 
Fruit tree crop-chicken farm: IS in Martinique,  cropland system of agroforestry in, 366; 
275-276 Youth Enterprise Initiative in, 41
Funding: Grey water: definition of, 180
 for agriculture, 50; Groundwater: 
 aquaculture, 383-384  contamination and pesticide drift, 214, 215; 
Fungi: natural control of, 154 nutrient pollution of, 223
Fusarium wilt: natural control of, 154 Growth substrate: selection and management 
of, 117-121
Ganpat, Wayne, 423 Guadeloupe: 
Garlic: in pest management, 143, 160  citrus farming in, 283-285;
Gender:  de novo banana cropping system in, 285-86
 in Caribbean agriculture, 2, 3; Guyana: water supply in, 174
 and division of labour, 15, 16, 20; 
 vs sex, 17; Haiti: 
 and women in farming, 24-26, 30  cropland system of agroforestry in, 366; 
Germination: planting and seed, 311-312 greenhouse farming in, 317, 319
Gilbert Agricultural and Rural Development Hardware disease: among ducks, 84
Centre (GARDC): in Antigua, 42 Harvesting: 
Gliricidia: pest repellent properties of, 160  of lettuce, 132-133; 
436 |
Index
 and maturation indices, 248-249; Immortelle: and shade trees, 362
 practices in post, 135; Indentured system: women in the, 16
 rainwater, 181-183 Indigenous knowledge: definition of, 141
Health: Industrial farm animal production (IFAP): in 
 food safety and duck, 81-82; animal production, 220
 and importation of food, 2 Information and communication technologies 
Health problems: (ICT): application in the fresh produce 
 among ducks, 82-85; industry, 245-246
 among rabbits, 65-66 Infrastructure: fresh produce industry and 
Heat resistant tomatoes:  varietal trials for, 310 inadequate, 245
Higglers: Innovation: in agriculture, 49
 definition of, 23; Insect pests: natural control of, 149-164
 and the market system, 16, 22-24 Insecticides: plant 156-162
Helping out our primary and secondary schools Integrated pest management (IPM): 
programme (HOOPSS): in St Lucia, 41-42  pesticides and, 215; 
Homegarden: system of agroforestry, 367-368  in vegetable production, 126-132
Homoeostasis, 64 Integrated systems (IS): in Caribbean 
Hot water treatment: of mangoes, 250-251 agriculture, 267, 273-277
Housing: duck, 75-76; rabbit, 63-63 Intercropping: in peasant farming, 274
Hucksters: definition of, 23 International Assessment of Agricultural 
Human capital: Science and Technology for Development 
 fresh produce industry and the training (IAASTD): and agriculture, 264-265
needs for, 247; International Centre for Research in 
 interventions in youth development, 48-51 Agroforestry (ICRAF), 355
Hybrid varieties: in vegetable production, 117 International standards: 
Hybridponics:  in food safety, 235-236 
 definition of, 345-346; Intensive system: 
 and research in non-traditional agriculture,  of animal production, 220; 
309, 310  of duck production, 74, 75-76
Hydro-cooling: of mangoes, 251 Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on 
Hydrological cycle: Caribbean, 172 Agriculture (IICA): and the economic 
Hydroponics: contribution of agricultural products, 10
 CFBC model of, 321-337; International Year of Family Farming: the UN 
 community farms and, 320; and the, 1
 growing media in, 340-343; Irrigation: 
 and research in non-traditional agriculture,  drip, 184, 318; 
309, 310;  increasing efficiency in, 183-184; 
 plant combinations in, 340-343;  weather conditions and, 216
 water usage research in, 339 Isaac, Wendy-Ann, 424
Israeli tomato cultivars: and planting research, 
311-312
| 437
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
Jamaica: aquaculture in, 382  and ES, 271-273; 
Jimson weed: pest repellent properties of, 164  global demand and increase in, 219; 
intensive systems in, 219; 
Kerosene: in pest management, 144  NPS and, 210; 
Khan, Ayub, 424  in St Kitts, 310; 
 soil erosion, 228-229; 
Labour force: participation in agriculture, 10, 12  stocking densities for, 222; 
Lallo, Cicero, 424  and waste management, 224-225; 
Land degradation: overgrazing and, 220  water management and, 188-190; 
Land preparation for rain shelters and net  women and, 18. See also Manure
houses, 121-123 Local knowledge: 
Lantana: pest repellent properties of, 160  definition of, 141; 
LaPlace, Stuart, 424  in pest management, 142-149; use of, 142
Latin America: Logistics: 
 aquaculture in, 380-381;  challenges, 245-246; 
 small scale farming in, 11  processing, 257; performance in LAC, 245
Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC): Logistics control: and quality control, 247-249
logistics performance in, 245
Leaf miner fly: natural control of, 150 Maharaj, Rohanie, 425
Lettuce production: Mammey: pest repellent properties of, 160-161
 CFBC research in, 339-340; Mango: 
 disease monitoring of, 128-132;  defects, 259-260;   
environmental factors and, 117;  fresh-cut technology for, 258; 
 harvesting of, 132-133;  infections, 259-260; 
 pest management in, 126, 145, 147;  post harvesting value chain for, 243; 
propagation in, 122; processing logistics, 257-258; 
 storage practices for, 133  quality and logistics control in post-
Large tunnel ventilated houses: and broiler harvesting of, 245-252; 
production, 219  value added products of, 258; 
Legislation:  weevil and post-harvesting, 254
 agroforestry, 373-374, 376; Manure: nitrogen in, 224. See also animal 
 T&T food and safety, 236; waste
 water, 186-187 Marigold: in pest management, 143, 155
Lighting: Market vendors: definition, 23
 egg production and, 77; Marketing: 
 and insect control, 155  and processing ducks, 85-86; 
Linkages: in agriculture, 49  women in agricultural, 22-24
Livestock faming systems (LFS): ecoservices Martinique: fruit tree crop-chicken farm in, 
and, 271-274 275-276
Livestock production: Mating: and rabbit breeding, 61-62
 and air pollution, 229-230; Maturation indices: harvesting and, 248
438 |
Index
Media selection, 313-314 Natural brooding: of ducklings, 79-80
Meehan, Kevin, 425 Natural incubation, 79
Melongene: protection methods for, 147 Natural plant insecticides, 156-164
Men: and wages, 19 Natural resources: family farms and the 
Mentorship: in youth development, 48-49 preservation of, 1
Methane emissions: and air pollution, 230 Neem: in pest management, 143, 161
Microbial contamination of: fresh water Nest facilities: for breeders, 77
sources, 226 Net houses (NH): 
Milk bush: pest repellent properties of, 161  construction of 113-115; 
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA):  design of, 109-112; 
and agriculture, 263;  land preparation for, 121-123; 
 framework, 268;  maintenance of, 135; 
 and ES, 269,  in monitoring environmental factors, 107, 
Ministry of Food Production (T&T): 108; 
 and the APDP, 41;  in vegetable production, 136
 and food safety, 236 Nile tilapia: and aquaculture, 381
Mixed farming: Nitrogen: and groundwater pollution, 224
 ES and, 270-271; Non-point source pollution (NPS) 
 on family farms, 9; management, 210-240
 and pest and disease control, 272 Non-traditional agriculture: and sustainable 
Mohammed, Majeed, 425 food production, 303-352
Moringa: pest repellent properties of, 161 Nutmeg: pest repellent properties of, 162
MorGwanik tool: and soil structure, 278 Nutrient: 
Mortality: in early-hatched ducklings, 79  management in hydroponics, 342-344; 
Mulching: description, 185 management in vegetable production, 124-
Multi-species systems: in the Caribbean, 273- 125; 
274  pollution of ground and surface water, 223
Mule duck, 70, 71 Nutrition and feeding: of ducks, 72-74, 81
Muscovy ducks, 69; natural incubation and, 79
Myxomatosis, 67 Ochro: pest control methods for, 145
O’Connor, Clare, 426
Naraine, Leighton, 426 Oleander: pest repellent properties of, 164
National Agricultural Marketing and Onion: pest repellent properties of, 164
Development Corporation (NAMDEVCO), Open-side naturally ventilated houses: and 
320 broiler production, 219
National Institute for Agricultural Research Organic fertilizers: effect of, 219
(INRA): Organic matter: agrosystems and soil, 278-279
 and the MorGwanic tool, 278; Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States 
 and SIMSERV, 277-278 (OECS): agricultural training in the, 42
National Forest Policy and National Protected Organoponics: 
Area Policy (T&T), 376  CFBC model of, 321-339, 344-345; 
| 439
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
commercialization of, 347-349; Pesticides: 
 definition, 344, 345;  environment and, 213; 
 pest control in, 346;   NPS and, 211-216
 and research in non-traditional agriculture, Pesticides and toxic Chemicals Act (T&T): 
309, 310;  and food safety, 236, 238
 water usage research in, 339 Pesticide toxicity: 
Overgrazing: land degradation and, 220, 221  measuring risk of, 214-215; 
Ozier-Lafontaine, Harry, 426  reducing risk of, 215-21
pH: of growth substrates, 120
Packchoi: protection methods for, 147 Pigeon peas: 
Packing house: sanitation protocols, 250  pest control methods for, 145; 
Packing house logistics: post-harvesting and,  storage of, 149
249-250 Pigs: feed for, 280
Pan-African Farmers’ Association: definition of Pierre, Amenold, 426-427
food security, 3 Pineapple mealybug: natural control of the, 152
Papaya: pest repellent properties of, 162 Plant combinations: in hydroponic cultivation, 
Participation research and development (PRD): 340-342
and agricultural research, 28 Plant growth: CFBC research on the impact of 
Parasites: and duck rearing, 84 shade on, 339-340
Partnerships: in development, 50 Plant insecticides: natural 156-164
Parturition: and rabbit breeding, 62 Plant material: preparation, 313
Phosphorous loss: management of, 218-219 Plant spacing: in vegetable production, 121, 123
Photo-degradation, 212 Plantain: protection methods for, 148
Physic nut: pest repellent properties of, 162 Plantation system: 
Physical control: of pests, 154-157  and family farms, 3, 4-6; 
Peasantry: development of the, 4-5  in St Kitts & Nevis, 305-308; 
Peasant farming. See Small farming  shade trees in the, 362; 
Persistence: definition of, 213  women in the, 15-16
Pesticide disposal: to reduce contamination, 216 Planting: seed germination and, 311-312
Pesticide drift: Planting density:  and shade trees, 362
 and groundwater contamination, 214; Policy: 
reducing, 215  agroforestry, 373-374, 376; 
Pesticide toxicity: definition of, 213-215  aquaculture, 383; water, 186-187
Pekin ducks, 68-69, 71; Pollution management, 210-240
 natural incubation and, 79 Post-harvest handling system: 
Peppers: pest control methods for, 145, 146  reduction of losses in the, 243-261; 
Pest and disease management:  value chain for mango, 243
 in hybridponics, 346; Post-harvest handling system for mango: 
 mixed farming and, 271; quality and logistics control in, 248-254
 in vegetable production, 126-132, 140-142, Potato: storage of, 149 
144-148, 154-162 Poultry production: stocking densities for, 222
440 |
Index
Poverty alleviation: Ramdwar, Marcus, 427
 and export production, 11; Ramnarine, Ravindra, 427-428
 and small producers, 2 Registration of Plant Varieties Act, 1997 (T&T), 
Praedial larceny: and aquaculture, 383 237
Premature bolting: in lettuce, 130 Regulatory environment: for food safety, 236-
Processing: ducks, 85-86 238
Promotion: of the agricultural sector, 49 Ripening: storage and, 252-253
Propagation: in vegetable production, 121, 123 Risk of pesticide toxicity: measuring, 214-215
Protected agriculture: Root crops: protection methods for, 146, 151
 description of, 107-108; Root rot: natural control of, 154
 in St Kitts & Nevis, 316-319 Rooting: and acclimation, 314
Protective markets: exports and the loss of, 231 Rural poor: and agriculture, 36
Proteins: Rural stability: and small producers, 13
 in duck nutrition, 72-73; Russett spotting: in lettuce, 130
 in rabbit nutrition, 56, 65
Public education: on water conservation, 187 Sanitation: 
Public Health Ordinance (T&T), 238  and food safety, 235; 
Pumpkin: pest control methods for, 145, 145  packing house, 250; 
Pursley: pest repellent properties of, 162  in vegetable production, 128, 154, 155
Pyrethrum: pest repellent properties of, 164 Salt water intrusion: control techniques, 184
Saturation: of peasant farms, 5
Quality control: and logistics control, 247-249 Scarecrows: in pest management, 144
Quassia: pest repellent properties of, 162-163 Seed germination: and planting, 311-312
Semi-intensive system: of duck production, 74, 
Rabbit: 75-76
 breeds, 55; Self-reliance: in agriculture, 49
 diseases in the Tropics, 66-68; Sex: vs gender, 17 
 nutrition and feeding of, 56-61; Shade: CFBC research on plant growth and, 
Rabbit production, 53-68; reproductive 339-340
management and, 61-62 Shade houses: 
Radio frequency identification (RFID)  and agricultural diversification, 309; 
Rain shelters (RS): models of, 318
 construction of 113-115; Shade trees: 
 design of, 109-112;  plantation crops and, 362; 
 land preparation for, 121-123;  and planting density, 362
 maintenance of, 134-135; Shannon Index of Entropy (SIE): and the 
 in monitoring environmental factors, 107, evaluation of agricultural diversification, 
108; 307-308
 in vegetable production, 136 Siew, Narendra, 428
Rainfall: in the Caribbean, 171-172, 179 SIMSERV: and the selection of cover crops for 
Rainwater harvesting and storage, 181-183 ES, 278
Rajack-Talley, Ann, 427
| 441
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
Silvopastoral: system of agroforestry, 360, 366-  agricultural diversification in, 307-308; 
367 aquaculture production in, 382; 
Skin mange: in rabbits, 67  domestic production in, 307; 
Slatted floor: for small ruminants, 219  food imports and exports in, 305; 
Slaughtering: ducks, 85-86 greenhouse farming in, 316-317; 
Slave labour: on sugar plantations, 15-16  protected agriculture in, 316-319; 
Small farming: sustainable food production in, 307; 
 intercropping in, 274;  sweet pepper farming in, 317; 
 and diversification of agriculture, 303-304  tomato farming in, 310, 317; 
Small island developing states (SIDS): and  water supply in, 174
climate change, 308-309 St Kitts and Nevis Aquaculture Pilot Project 
Small producers: &Environmental Research (SNAPPER), 
 evolution of, 4-6; 382-389
 and global food production, 1-2; St Lucia: 
 and risk, 8-9;  HOOPSS in, 41-42; 
 socio-demographic characteristics of, 7-8  tilapia production in, 380-389; 
Small ruminants:  tissue culture in, 315; 
 feeds for, 280;  water supply in, 174
 slatted floor for, 219; St Martin, Chaney, 428
 stocking densities for, 222. St Vincent and the Grenadines: tissue culture 
 See also Sheep and Goats in, 315
Snuffles, 66 Step-by-step: farm design system, 282, 283-
Soapy water: in pest management, 143 284
Soilless substrates: selection of, 117-121 Stocking density: 
Soil erosion: livestock production and, 228-229  in mixed farming, 276; 
Soil organic matter (OM): and agrosystems, 278  in rabbit production, 64-65
Soil protection: Storage pests: control of, 145-148
 agroforestry and, 370; Storage: 
 mixed farming and, 270  rainwater harvesting and, 181-183; 
Soil and water:  and ripening, 252-253
 conservation, 185-186; Sugar Industry Diversification Foundation: and 
 role of, 177-178, 370-371 greenhouse farming in St Kitts, 316 
Soil quality: fertilizer use and, 217 Sugar plantations: enslaved women and 
Sore hocks, 68 division of labour on, 15-16
Sorting and grading: of mangoes, 251-252 Sulphur powder: and insect control, 155
Soursop: pest repellent properties of, 157-158 Sunday markets: under slavery, 16
Soyabean: pest repellent properties of, 164 Surface water: 
Spatial distribution: of livestock in water  in the Caribbean, 176; 
management, 188  nutrient pollution of, 223-224; 
Spray-drying: technology, 258-259  storage, 184
St Kitts & Nevis: Suriname: water supply in, 174
442 |
Index
Sustainable development: Transhipment: of fresh produce in LAC, 245
 family farms and, 2, 3, 9-14; Transportation: 
 working group to promote, 381  of fresh produce from field to packing 
Sustainable value chain framework: house, 249; 
 in agriculture, 43-44  logistics, 256
Sustainability: Transplanting: 
 teaching, 50;  in vegetable production, 121, 123 
 in the value chain framework, 44 Traps: in large pest control, 144
Sweet potato: Tree crops: protection methods for, 148
 pest repellent properties of, 164; Trinidad & Tobago: 
 post-harvest protection of, 148;  Agricultural Incentive Programme , 376; 
 protection methods for, 146 animal wildlife programme in, 276; 
Sweet potato weevil: natural control of the, 151  APDP, 41; 
Swine: stocking densities for, 222  community-based agroforestry in, 375-376; 
 duck research in, 70-72; 
Tamarind: pest repellent properties of, 164  food safety legislation in, 236-237; 
Tannia: storage of, 149  forestry legislation in, 376; rabbit 
Taungya system: production in, 65; 
 of agroforestry in T&T, 365, 374  taungya system of agroforestry, 365; 
Testbed system, 318 wastewater treatment in, 183; 
Temperature: and rabbit production, 63-64  water supply in, 174;YAPA in, 41
Thermoneutral zone, 64 Trinidad & Tobago Agribusiness Association 
Thrips: natural control of, 154 (TTBA):  and agro-processing in T&T, 320
Tilapia: Twickenham Farm: and aquaculture 
 production in Atlantic seawater, 380-389 production, 382
Tipburn: in lettuce, 130
Tissue culture: Unemployment: among small producers, 2
 in the Caribbean, 315-316; United Nations (UN): on the role of family 
 practices, 312-314 farms in food production, 1-2, 11
Tissue Culture Unit: in St Lucia, 315 United States of America (USA): food and 
Tobacco: pest repellent properties of, 164 safety legislation, 237
Tomatoes: United States Agency for International 
 pest control methods for, 145, 146; Development (USAID): and greenhouse 
 pest repellent properties of, 163; farming in Haiti, 
 varietal trials for heat resistant, 310 University of Central Florida: and research in 
Tosoloy farm, 274-275 non-traditional agriculture, 308-309 
Toxicity: measuring risk of pesticide, 214-215 University of Nouvelle Grand Anse (UNOGA): 
Traditional agriculture: water usage research and agro-processing, 320; 
in, 339  and protected agriculture, 318;
Transfer: pollution by, 212 University of the West Indies (UWI): duck 
Transformational learning: definition of, 38 research by, 70-71
| 443
 Sustainable Food Production Practices in the Caribbean
Urine: in pest management, 143-144 Water solubility: definition of, 213
Water usage: experiments at the CFBC, 338-
Vacuum cooling: of lettuce, 133 339
Valet, Serge, 428 Waterlogging: problems, 187-188
Value chain framework: Watermelon: pest control methods for, 145, 145
 sustainable, 43; Waxing: of mangoes, 252
 youth in the, 44 Webster, Nicole, 429
Vapour pressure: definition of, 213 West Indies Royal Commission: and small 
Varietal trials: and research in non-traditional farms, 6
agriculture, 309, 310 Weed control: in crop management, 144-145; 
Vegetable crops: natural control of insect pests  in mixed farming in Martinique, 275;  
in, 149-162  in vegetable production, 140, 141
Vegetable production: Whitefly: natural control of, 150-151
 Pest and disease management, 126-132; Wild chataigne: 
 propagation in, 121-123;  pest repellent properties of, 163
 protection methods, 146; Wild coffee: pest repellent properties of, 164
 rain shelters and net houses in, 107-136; Wild mammals: feeds for, 281
sanitation in, 128 Windbreaks, 363-364
Vervene: pest repellent properties of, 163 WINNER programme: and greenhouse farming 
Veterinary drug residues: and water in Haiti, 317
contamination, 227 Women: in Caribbean agriculture, 2, 3, 13, 
Virus hepatitis: in ducks, 85 14-26
Vocational training: for farmers, 29 World Agroforestry Centre, 355
World Food Summit (1996): definition of food 
Wages: and women in agriculture, 16 security, 3
Waste management: livestock production and, World Health Organisation (WHO): 
224-225   classification of pesticide toxicity, 213
Wastewater: use of effluent and, 182-183 Wuddivira, Mark, 429
Water and Sewage Authority (WASA): and 
drought in Trinidad & Tobago, 183 Yam: post-harvest protection of, 148; 
Water conservation systems, 184, 370-371; protection methods for, 146; storage of, 149
 in livestock production, 189 Yolk sac infection: among ducks, 83
Water management practices: sustainable, Youth: agriculture and rural, 34-50; as change 
169-190 agents, 38-39; and transformational 
Water problems: vulnerability to, 178-179 learning, 38
Water quality: tilapia and, 383 Youth Apprenticeship Programme in 
Water recycling, 182 Agriculture (YAPA): Trinidad, 41, 48
Water resources: Youth development programmes: model for 
 animal waste and contamination of, 224; in selected, 39-42
the Caribbean, 173; Youth Enterprise Initiative: in Grenada, 41
 fertilizer use and contamination of, 217. Youth making a difference (YMD): and rural 
 See also Ground water and Surface water transformation, 39
444 |