CRI

 [ABSTRACT]

Background and Problem Statement

South Korea’s livestock industry has experienced rapid growth driven by increasing meat consumption. However, the annual generation of approximately 50 million tons of livestock manure has led to persistent and serious environmental issues, including soil and groundwater contamination, odor emissions, and greenhouse gas emissions. According to a 2022 survey, a total of 50,732 thousand tons of livestock manure is generated nationwide each year, of which 52.1% is treated on-farm by individual producers, while 47.9% is managed through outsourced treatment systems.

At the same time, crop farming has become highly dependent on chemical fertilizers and pesticides, resulting in declining soil organic matter and ecosystem degradation. Despite efforts to expand environmentally friendly agriculture, the stable supply of organic fertilizers remains insufficient. In this context, crop–livestock integrated agriculture has gained attention as a resource-circulating system that utilizes livestock manure as fertilizer for crop 

production and recycles crop by-products as livestock feed. Purpose of the Study This study aims to comprehensively diagnose the institutional, technological, and social foundations of crop–livestock integrated agriculture and to propose region-specific circulation models and implementation strategies tailored to the characteristics of Chungcheongbuk-do. In light of urgent challenges such as climate change, environmental pollution, and resource depletion, the establishment of practical alternatives through crop–livestock integration is increasingly critical for achieving sustainable agriculture.

Evolution of Crop–Livestock Integrated Agriculture Crop–livestock integrated agriculture represents a survival strategy practiced by humanity 

for thousands of years and constitutes one of the most complete models of a circular economy. Recently, global agricultural policies have shifted from a productivity-centered paradigm toward a resource-efficiency-oriented circular economy.

Historically, the first stage (pre-Industrial Revolution) was characterized by natural integration, in which crop farming and livestock production were inseparable within self-sufficient circular systems. The second stage (mid-20th century to the 1980s) witnessed the emergence of chemical fertilizers, resulting in a “metabolic rift” between crops and livestock. The third stage (1990s–2000s) involved the introduction of stringent regulations, 

such as the EU Nitrates Directive, in response to environmental crises. The current fourth stage (2010s–present) has evolved toward a “circular bioeconomy” aimed at addressing climate change and achieving carbon neutrality.

Technological Developments Livestock manure treatment technologies have advanced toward diversified resource recovery systems, including solid–liquid separation (screw press, inclined screen, centrifugation), composting (open and enclosed systems), liquid fertilization through anaerobic digestion, and biogas production. Environmental impact mitigation technologies focus on reducing methane and nitrous oxide emissions, lowering ammonia emissions, and preventing water pollution.

In addition, smart livestock management systems based on ICT—such as individual animal monitoring, automated feeding, environmental control, and manure generation forecasting—are increasingly being adopted. Feed production technologies have also become more sophisticated, encompassing the cultivation of winter crops (e.g., whole-crop barley and rye) and summer crops (e.g., maize and whole-crop rice), silage production, utilization of food by-products as feed, and the manufacturing of total mixed rations (TMR). International Experiences Countries such as Germany, the Netherlands, Japan, and the United States have developed crop–livestock integrated agriculture through institutional frameworks tailored to  their national contexts, demonstrating diverse yet effective policy approaches. Livestock and Manure Management in Chungcheongbuk-do An analysis of livestock production in Chungcheongbuk-do shows a spatially concentrated structure across species. Hanwoo cattle average 233,422 head, concentrated mainly in Boeun-gun (15.9%), Chungju-si (10.4%), and Okcheon-gun and Eumseong-gun (each 9.1%), with an average annual decline of 2.5% over the past three years. Beef cattle number approximately 6,913 head, with 51.1% concentrated in Cheongju-si, and have sharply declined at an annual rate of 9.1%, raising concerns about the sustainability of the production base. Dairy cattle average 18,114 head, concentrated in Cheongju-si (41.8%) and Jincheon-gun (17.9%), and continue to decrease annually by 1.4% due to aging farmers and structural contraction.

Pig production averages 397,898 head, with 67% concentrated in Jincheon, Cheongju, and Eumseong, showing a relatively stable but gradually declining trend (–2.4% annually). Broilers average 17,318 thousand birds, with 70% concentrated in Eumseong (24.9%) and Jincheon (17.1%), and have declined slightly (–3.1% annually). Laying hens average 5,430 thousand birds, with 62.7% concentrated in Eumseong (40.5%) and Okcheon (22.2%). While 

the overall trend shows a modest annual increase of 1.1%, small-scale regions are experiencing sharp declines.

In terms of manure management, Hanwoo and beef cattle exhibit a relatively high proportion (39.2%) of short- to mid-term collection cycles (1–3 months), exceeding the national average (22.2%). Dairy cattle primarily rely on mid-term storage systems (3–6 months), accounting for 40.6%. Pig farms demonstrate a high share of daily to short-term collection (less than two weeks), with 15% adopting continuous collection, indicating strong potential for automated and continuous treatment facilities. Broiler farms typically collect manure in bulk within two months (49.5%), reflecting production cycle characteristics, while laying hen farms combine short-term (less than one week, 34.6%) and continuous collection (30.3%).

Manure treatment facilities are largely centered on composting facilities (1,142,825 m³) and compost storage facilities (727,921 m³), while capacities for liquid fertilizer and purification facilities remain relatively low compared to national averages. Compost is mainly applied within the province (approximately 860 thousand tons annually), though 210 thousand tons are transported outside the region. Liquid fertilizer is almost entirely treated within the province (19 thousand tons). Structural Limitations and Challenges Although a crop–livestock circulation structure exists in Chungcheongbuk-do, it remains limited to informal, farm-level linkages and has not developed into a systematic, region-wide system. The current structure is better described as a “customary practice” rather than an integrated system. The heavy reliance on compost-based treatment, without sufficient consideration of crop- and region-specific nutrient absorption capacity, poses long-term risks of nitrogen and phosphorus accumulation in soils and a potential shift toward environmental burdens.

Moreover, scientific management tools—such as digital nutrient management, application history tracking, and quality information sharing—remain at an early stage, constraining policy effectiveness and objective monitoring. High levels of farmer aging and the dominance of small- and medium-sized farms further limit sustained participation, as integrated agriculture is often perceived as an additional labor and management burden. 

Facility-centered, short-term support policies are insufficient to ensure long-term continuity.

Policy Directions and Chungcheongbuk-do Model To establish a regional circulation governance system, it is necessary to create county-level “Regional Circulation Agriculture Councils” involving livestock and crop farmers, agricultural cooperatives, local governments, and private enterprises. These councils should support the expansion of joint resource recovery facilities and operate them under cooperative ownership models.

A GIS-based integrated platform should be developed to manage farm-level nutrient balances, compost production histories, application plans, and distribution routes. Performance-based incentive schemes should be introduced, providing differentiated subsidies based on carbon reduction, resource circulation rates, and compost quality grades. In addition, a “Circulation Farm Certification System” should be linked to public food procurement and eco-friendly branding to ensure premium pricing. ESG-linked private compensation models should also be introduced, enabling contract farming with food and 

distribution companies and the utilization of carbon credits. To strengthen farmer capacity, a “Nutrient Management Specialist” system should be

established to provide services such as circulation planning, compost quality diagnosis, fertilization consulting, and certification support. Customized education programs should be developed by farm type (crop, livestock, mixed) and scale (small, medium, large), alongside the dissemination of “Smart Crop–Livestock Integration Packages” targeting young farmers. Furthermore, a Chungcheongbuk-do–specific spatial management model based on 

nutrient absorption capacity should be introduced. This model would analyze crop structures, soil characteristics, and manure generation volumes at county and regional levels to establish appropriate nutrient loading thresholds. Areas with surplus capacity should be encouraged to expand circulation, while overloaded areas should adopt differentiated strategies, including application reductions, inter-regional transport, and alternative treatment methods.

Conclusion Chungcheongbuk-do possesses favorable physical conditions for crop–livestock integrated agriculture, given the spatial coexistence of livestock production and crop farming. However, it remains at a “preventive management stage” rather than a fully institutionalized system. While the compost-centered treatment structure has positive aspects, long-term risks of nutrient imbalance persist, and limited digital management capacity combined with farmer aging poses challenges to sustainability.

The Chungcheongbuk-do model can be designed not merely as a problem-solving environmental policy, but as a forward-looking agricultural transformation strategy. Rather than emphasizing regulatory tightening, it should prioritize preventive management, performance-based incentives, and regional cooperative governance. Seven key implementation tasks are proposed: (1) establishment of regional circulation agriculture councils; (2) construction of joint resource recovery facilities; (3) development of a nutrient management platform; (4) introduction of performance-based incentives; (5) implementation of a circulation agriculture certification system; (6) training of educators and consultants; and (7) pilot development of smart circulation farms led by young farmers. By linking carbon neutrality policies, local food strategies, and integrated agricultural– environmental policies, the Chungcheongbuk-do model can be developed into a leading policy case that is transferable to other regions nationwide.