Beyond the agroecological and sustainable agricultural intensification debate: Is blended sustainability the way forward?

With the sustainable development goals has come a renewed global interest in ending hunger and achieving food security, while preventing natural resource degradation. Despite this renewed interest and increased commitments to invest in agricultural development, there is an outstanding debate over the technological trajectories to sustainability. The debate centres on sustainable agricultural intensification (SAI) and agroecological intensification (AEI) pathways to agricultural sustainability. Using a systematic literature review approach, this study examines the debate over AEI and SAI. This study employs a theoretical framework based on the economic, social, and ecological dimensions of sustainable agriculture within a policy and institutional space. Based on the sustainability dimensions, a discourse analytical technique is applied to unravel the debate. The results reveal differences in actor composition in the SAI and AEI pathways. Both pathways aim to promote food security with optimal and sustainable use of inputs; however, the actors differ on discourse relating to the concept of farming, the role of genetic engineering, the scale of operation, land use and soil health. Resolving these differences requires a blended sustainability approach that moves beyond the current AEI and SAI debate by acknowledging the tradeoffs and synergies of the socio-economic and ecological dimensions.     

National Development and South-South Cooperation: Moving Forward An Analytical Commentary on the Report of the South Commission*

Abstract: The Report of the South Commission has been, and should be, broadly welcome by both the peoples of the South and North. It is addressed in the first place to the peoples and governments of the developing countries. But given the growing global interdependence, the Report is also addressed to the North in the context of the constraints and opportunities the industrial economies present for the development prospects of the South. The primary responsibility for development in the countries of the South, however, lies in the South. This short paper, therefore, focuses on national development policies in particular, with some reference also to related issues in South–South cooperation. The paper indicates some strategic considerations which may be useful in terms of advancing toward the key goals articulated in the Commission's Report. Undoubtedly, there remains room for debating, modifying and enriching the development agenda proposed by the Commission, but there is no question that a highly welcome framework has been constructed for practically addressing the problems of the South. The remarks in the paper are made with this conviction. The countries of the South should be able to make timely advances to improve the lot of their people by, among other things, enriching and modifying their strategic approaches to development management – by continuing the search for agents of socio-economic change, sharpening policy focal points, ensuring greater consistency between policies and instruments, enhancing capacity for timely change, advancing significantly in addressing the foundations of long-term development, and adopting greater pragmatism in creating new structures and institutions. Résumé: Le rapport de la commission du Sud a été et devrait être largement accueilli aussi bien par les peuples du Sud que du Nord. II s'adresse en premier lieu aux peuples et aux gouvernements des pays en développement. Mais compte tenu de I'interdépendance mondiale, le rapport s'adresse aussi au Nord dans le contexte des difficultés et des occasions que les économies industrialisées présentent en ce qui concerne les perspectives de développement du Sud. La première responsabilité de développement dans les pays du sud se trouve, toutefois au Sud. Ce bref rapport met done l'accent sur les politiques nationales de développement en particulier en faisant référence aussi aux questions connexes de coopération Sud-Sud. Il indique certaines considérations stratégiques qui peuvent etre utiles en termes d'avancement vers les principaux buts soulignés dans le rapport de la commission. Il y à sans aucun doute de la place permettant de discuter de modifier et d'enrichir Pordre du jour de développement proposé par la commission, mais il ne fait pas de doute qu'un cadre hautement acceptable a été créé pour aborder de fagon pratique les problèmes du Sud. Les remarques sont faites dans le document avec cette conviction. Les pays du Sud devraient pouvoir faire des avances en temps opportun pour améliorer le sort de leur population, notamment en enrichissant et en modifiant leurs approches stratégiques de la gestion du développement en fournissant la recherche des agents du changement socio-économique, en relevant les points focaux de la politique en veillant à une plus grande harmonie entre les politiques et les instruments, en augmentant la capacité de changement en temps opportun, en avançant de façon significative pour aborder les fondements du développement à long terme, et en faisant preuve d'un plus grand pragmatisme dans la création de nouvelles structures et institutions.     

Income distribution and total factor productivity: a cross-country panel cointegration analysis

International Economics and Economic Policy - This study investigates the relationship between income inequality and total factor productivity (TFP) across countries for a period covering the years...     

A multi-level and multi-actor approach to risk governance: a conceptual framework to support policy development for Ambrosia weed control

Invasive species such as Ambrosia (an annual weed) pose a biosecurity risk whose management depends on the knowledge, attitudes and practices of many stakeholders. It can therefore be considered a complex policy and risk governance problem. Complex policy problems are characterised by high uncertainty, multiple dimensions, interactions across different spatial and policy levels, and the involvement of a multitude of actors and organisations. This paper provides a conceptual framework for analysing the multi-level and multi-actor dimensions of Ambrosia management. Potential and existing public, private and public–private management strategies are identified to address the interests and needs of different actor groups across different levels. We conclude that policies that promote a mix of public and private Ambrosia management strategies may respond better to the needs and interests of different actor groups across different levels than a one-size-fits-all approach. However, multiple policy strategies need to be aligned in order to lead to synergies and spreading coherent messages to the public. Collaboration may enhance the likelihood of biosecurity management and risk governance of Ambrosia being adequately implemented and enforced.