A coevolutionary model for promoting agricultural sustainability

This article presents a coevolutionary model of agricultural development that is based on observations from the environmental history of agriculture and the need for addressing development processes toward sustainability. It asserts that the challenge of agricultural sustainability can be fruitfully addressed within an analytical framework that consciously and explicitly considers agricultural development as consisting of processes of coevolution involving agriculture and the surrounding ecological and socioeconomic systems. Widening the processes to include strong interconnectedness with national and global systems with respect to off-farm resources and farm outputs has led to various agro-ecological problems. Strengthening local interaction and interconnectedness in a rural-urban context is found to be essential for developing a system of sustainable agriculture. Such development requires influencing many subsystems and implementing changes in production methods and land use as short-term responses to the problem, and technological development, resource allocation and changes in values as long-term responses. It also requires some sustainability principles and indicators in order to direct actions and to facilitate communications, which can be derived from the model. Applying the model on Swedish agricultural sustainability during the twentieth century reveals some, probably, important findings for “building” sustainable agriculture and lends support to the usefulness of the model.     

A new method for assessing the sustainability of land-use systems (II): Evaluating impact indicators

In the past decade, numerous indicators and indicator sets for sustainable agriculture and sustainable land management have been proposed. In addition to their interest in comparing different management systems on an indicator by indicator basis, land managers are often interested in comparing individual indicators against a threshold, or, in order to study trade-offs, against each other. To this end it is necessary to (1) transform the original indicators into a comparable format, and (2) score these transformed indicators against a sustainability function.This paper introduces an evaluation method for land-use-related impact indicators, which was designed to accomplish these tasks. It is the second of a series of two papers, and as such it links into a larger framework for sustainability assessment of land use systems.The evaluation scheme introduced here comprises (1) a standardisation procedure, which aims at making different indicators comparable. In this procedure indicators are first normalised, by referencing them to the total impact they contribute towards, and then they are corrected by a factor describing the severity of this total impact in terms of exceeding a threshold. The procedure borrows conceptually from Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Impact Analysis methodology; (2) a valuation procedure, which judges the individual standardised indicators with regard to sustainability.This methodology is then tested on an indicator set for the environmental impact of a spinach production system in Northwest Germany. The method highlights mineral resource consumption, greenhouse gas emission, eutrophication and impacts on soil quality as the most important environmental effects of the studied system.We then explore the effect of introducing weighting factors, reflecting the differing societal perception of diverse environmental issues. Two different sets of weighting factors are used. The influence of weighting is, however, small compared to that of the standardisation procedure introduced earlier.Finally, we explore the propagation of uncertainty (defined as a variable's 95% confidence limits) throughout the standardisation procedure using a stochastic simulation approach. The uncertainty of the analysed standardised indicator was higher than that of the non-standardised indicators by a factor of 2.0 to 2.5.     

What is sustainable agriculture? Empirical evidence of diverging views in Switzerland and New Zealand

Public debates on sustainable agriculture tend to be shaped by dominant political stakeholders with a particular political agenda. They simultaneously contribute and respond to the formation of public opinion. In this paper, we investigate to what extent stakeholder attitudes and interests help explain national conceptions of sustainable agriculture and how these conceptions diverge between countries with different agricultural policies.For that purpose, we conducted two stakeholder perception surveys in Switzerland and New Zealand. The data analysis revealed that there are significant differences in perception between the two countries. While Swiss respondents felt that Swiss agriculture is already quite sustainable and that international trade and new technologies are likely to render it less sustainable, New Zealand respondents generally thought that economic and technological change is necessary to make agriculture more sustainable. The conservative Swiss attitude is in accordance with the country's defensive agricultural policy while the more progressive New Zealand attitude is clearly linked to its need to reconcile agricultural sustainability with national competitiveness.     

Developing post-normal technologies for sustainability

The last two decades have seen the development of an array of techniques and practices aimed at promoting sustainability. For many, results have been disappointing. There are charges that supposedly new organisational approaches remain embedded in managerialist, functionalist and anti-dialogic frameworks that are a significant part of the problem. Similarly the technocratic scientization of public policy is viewed as ill-equipped to deal with the social, economic and ecological issues currently facing neo-liberal societies. In this paper we seek to interpret these frustrations and identify pathways that move beyond this. Specifically, we argue that the gap between sustainability rhetoric and sustainability practices can be reconceptualised through the practice of science as post-normal and through developing the notion of post-normal sustainability technologies (PNSTs). The exponents of post-normal science show why stakeholder engagement in sustainability (and other scientific) issues is critical for the legitimacy and quality of decisions and the admission of complexity in decision-making and accountability processes. Building on this now well-established foundation we seek to characterise, and give examples of, PNSTs as tools for achieving this participation; wherein stakeholders assume expertise and interact with those possessing more traditional forms of expertise in order to co-produce knowledge about sustainability. Recognition of ideological and value diversity is also central to the post-normal sustainability agenda and with PNSTs, the values-based nature of the issues involved is articulated in a way that seeks to bring politics openly into the picture. To this end we identify processes that are emerging in the literature and in practice that will enable PNSTs. These include extended peer communities and multi-actor heuristics, agonistic processes and new characterisations of citizenship that support moves to sustainability. In so doing, we believe that PNSTs offer “clumsy solutions” for “wicked problems” that can be engaged with in both the research and practice arenas as significant contributions to addressing urgent needs.     

Planting flexibility: Implications for agricultural sustainability

There is a general belief that federal commodity programs restrict adoption of more sustainable production systems. In the 1990 farm legislation, Congress introduced limited planting flexibility to address these concerns and to reduce federal farm program costs. This program estimates the impact of planting flexibility on selected agricultural sustainability indicators and its policy implications. Results show that planting flexibility is a necessary but not sufficient condition for implementing more sustainable production systems. Other factors such as the availability of economically viable alternatives, macroeconomic conditions, and local resource and environmental concerns need to be considered. Policy reforms can help in achieving economic and environmental gains only in locations with economically viable alternatives. In other cases, increased research and development of new systems are needed to achieve desired results.     

Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability

The normative implications of participatory research imply ongoing social learning that ought to lead to personal and institutional transformation. Sustainability science also requires reflexive scientific practice in order to enable the co-generation of solutions that take account of uncertainty and multiple forms of knowledge. However, there is little published peer-reviewed material on how to assess to what degree the rhetoric regarding the benefits of participatory research are achieved in practice, particularly with regard to participatory research for sustainability. This paper outlines how linking the rationales for participatory research and for sustainability science to the principles of evaluation can deliver a conceptually coherent evaluation framework for assessment. The approach for evaluating participatory research in this context consists of framing the evaluation, i.e., setting boundaries on the subject within its social, political, environmental and institutional context and selecting appropriate criteria, methods and data sources. The application of the framework, using a summative evaluation of participatory research for sustainability in north-east Australia, illustrates its strengths and weaknesses, concluding with a consideration of its applicability to further participatory sustainability science.     

Dynamics of the North-South welfare gap and global sustainability

The vast heterogeneity among nations in terms of economic and demographic characteristics is evident, despite being overlooked in some global studies. In this heterogeneity, it is possible to identify some distinct aggregate classes differing at some very fundamental level: developing (South) nations and developed (North) nations may have very different, asymmetric problems, goals and structures. This study investigates these two distinct groups of socio-economic systems, as they interact in a context of global sustainability. We identify population, economic growth, welfare gap, energy supply and pollution as key issues and analyze them using a systems perspective. A dynamic feedback model, which discriminates the two groups of nations, is constructed to study the dynamics of variables related to the above key issues. The model is tested using extensive data between the years 1980-2005. According to the reference behavior covering the period 1980-2050, it is not viable to close the welfare gap between North and South, given the current prevailing non-renewable-resource-based growth system. A non-renewable-resource-based system adopted by the economic system of growing South would take the global system even closer to its limits. It is observed that indicators like reserve-to-demand ratio fail to provide reliable signals for a timely transition to alternative resources, and a very serious economic recession due to resource scarcity is likely to develop in the next couple of decades. By coupling the demographic and economic dynamics, it is shown that an economic slowdown due to a resource scarcity may have a dramatic widening effect on the already existing welfare gap. Scenario and policy experiments verify the widely accepted importance of stabilizing the population growth in South, transition to alternative energy resources, and investment support to the South in this transition simultaneously in order to reduce the welfare gap between the two blocks. It is observed that enthusiastic targets for an energy transition may have a serious negative impact on the welfare level experienced in South, whereas an energy transition in South supported by North seems to have the most desirable outcome regarding the welfare gap.     

What influences agricultural professionals' views towards organic agriculture?

Organic agriculture is a farming system that is considered by some to have beneficial impacts on the future sustainability of agriculture. Although some research has studied the attitudes of consumers and farmers, in particular what factors influence the willingness of consumers to pay organic premiums and what factors influence farmers to adopt organic farming, no studies have considered what influences the attitudes of agricultural professionals (extension officers, scientists, academics and researchers). Given the key role that agricultural professionals play in influencing farmer adoption of agricultural innovations and conducting research, their views on farming systems may be critical for overall adoption. This study reports the results of a telephone survey conducted in 2004, with 185 agricultural professionals surveyed for their views towards organic farming. A particular aim was to study how increased knowledge and experience influenced attitudes towards organic agriculture. Using an ordered probit regression framework, some of the significant key influences on attitudes towards organic farming were: knowledge; experience; education; informational; occupational effects; and attitudes on the individual aspects of organic agriculture. The study finds support for the hypothesis that professionals with increased organic knowledge and experience are more likely to think favourably about organic agriculture.     

A general equilibrium assessment of climate change–induced loss of agricultural productivity in Nepal

The impact of climate change on agriculture has been one of the most discussed topics in the literature on climate change. Multi-regional computable general equilibrium (CGE) models have frequently been used to examine the impact of climate change on agriculture. However, these studies do not focus on country-specific issues related to the link between climate change and agriculture. This paper aims to address this gap by investigating the economy-wide impacts of climate change on Nepalese agriculture. Nepal makes an interesting case study as it has one of the most vulnerable agricultural economies in South Asia. This paper develops a comparative static multi-household CGE model to trace the direct and indirect impacts of climate change in Nepal. The results suggest that climate change has a significant negative impact on the overall Nepalese economy due to the induced loss of agricultural productivity. The results further reveal that rural households in Nepal, whose livelihoods primarily depend on subsistence farming, will face additional climate change–induced stresses due to already overstrained poverty and a weak social welfare system. The results indicate an urgent need to mainstream adaptation strategies to lessen the negative impacts of any climate change–induced loss of agricultural productivity in Nepal.     

Policy assessment and simulation of actor orientation for sustainable development

Understanding, assessing, and simulating behavior requires knowledge of the precepts that are explicitly or implicitly orienting behavior. Human actors can be viewed as (conscious) self-organizing systems attempting to remain viable in a diverse environment containing other self-organizing systems (other human actors, organisms, ecosystems, etc.), all driven by their own viability (sustainability) interests. These fundamental system interests, or basic orientors, have emerged in response to general environmental properties and are therefore identical across self-organizing systems: existence, effectiveness, freedom of action, security, adaptability, coexistence. Even in simulated actors learning to ‘survive’ in a difficult environment, the basic orientors emerge in the (simulated) evolutionary process — but different actors may evolve into different ‘cultural types’ with different orientor emphasis. Since balanced attention to all basic orientors is crucial for viability, the set of orientors can be used to derive indicators that facilitate comprehensive viability and sustainability assessments. The paper outlines the theoretical approach of ‘orientation theory’ and its application to the assessment and simulation of sustainable development issues. The formal approach of mapping indicators on basic orientors and assessing sustainability dynamics is illustrated using Worldwatch indicator time series. In an actor simulation this approach is used to successfully guide a small global model onto a sustainable path with high ‘quality of life’.     

Maximising sustainability of Dutch dairy farming systems for different stakeholders: A modelling approach

A multi-attribute sustainability function is included into a dairy farm LP-model by using Weighted Goal Programming. The created Weighted Linear Goal Programming (WLGP)-model is used to maximise sustainability of different Dutch dairy farming systems and to analyse the impact of: (1) maximisation of individual sustainability aspects (economic, social and ecological sustainability) and (2) maximisation of overall sustainability using stakeholder preferences. Maximising the individual aspects of both dairy farming systems, i.e. conventional and organic, shows the trade-offs between different aspects of sustainability. For conventional as well as organic dairy farming maximum scores are highest for external social sustainability. The conventional dairy farm achieves a slightly higher score for overall sustainability than the organic dairy farm for all stakeholders (i.e. consumers and producers). This shows that it is possible for conventional dairy farms, similar to the conventional farm used in the analysis especially regarding the stocking density and under Dutch policy conditions, to achieve equal sustainability scores in comparison with organic dairy farms. It is concluded that the WLGP model is a suitable tool to analyse the sustainability of different dairy farming systems.     

Managing complex adaptive systems — A co-evolutionary perspective on natural resource management

The overexploitation of natural resources and the increasing number of social conflicts following from their unsustainable use point to a wide gap between the objectives of sustainability and current resource management practices. One of the reasons for the difficulties to close this gap is that for evolving complex systems like natural and socio-economic systems, sustainability cannot be a static objective. Instead sustainable development is an open evolutionary process of improving the management of social-ecological systems, through better understanding and knowledge. Therefore, natural resource management systems need to be able to deal with different temporal, spatial and social scales, nested hierarchies, irreducible uncertainty, multidimensional interactions and emergent properties. The co-evolutionary perspective outlined in this paper serves as heuristic device to map the interactions settled in the networks between the resource base, social institutions and the behaviour of individual actors. For this purpose we draw on ideas from complex adaptive systems theory, evolutionary theory and evolutionary economics. Finally, we outline a research agenda for a co-evolutionary approach for natural resource management systems.     

The inherent dangers of using computable general equilibrium models as a single integrated modelling framework for sustainability impact assessment. A critical note on Böhringer and Löschel (2006)

The search for methods of assessment that best evaluate and integrate the trade-offs and interactions between the economic, environmental and social components of development has been receiving a new impetus due to the requirement that sustainability concerns be incorporated into the policy formulation process. A paper forthcoming in Ecological Economics [Böhringer, C., Löschel, A., in press. Computable general equilibrium models for sustainability impact assessment: status quo and prospects, Ecological Economics.] claims that Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) models may potentially represent the much needed “back-bone” tool to carry out reliable integrated quantitative Sustainability Impact Assessments (SIAs). While acknowledging the usefulness of CGE models for some dimensions of SIA, this commentary questions the legitimacy of employing this particular economic modelling tool as a single integrating modelling framework for a comprehensive evaluation of the multi-dimensional, dynamic and complex interactions between policy and sustainability. It discusses several inherent dangers associated with the advocated prospects for the CGE modelling approach to contribute to comprehensive and reliable sustainability impact assessments. The paper warns that this reductionist viewpoint may seriously infringe upon the basic values underpinning the SIA process, namely a transparent, heterogeneous, balanced, inter-disciplinary, consultative and participatory take to policy evaluation and building of the evidence-base.     

Improving the industrial anticipation of current scientific activity

There is now widespread realization that new scientific findings are the foundations of much of tomorrow's technical and economic growth. How might one shorten awareness of scientific progress and possible applications? Several concepts are suggested—a) speculations of scientists involved, b) analysis of current government funding of research projects (per Klingman), c) retrospective analysis of the evolution of a scientific field to identify precedent influential factors, d) normative forecasts of scientists reviewing their field (“what could be”), e) normative forecasts of scientists seeking support for new work (“what should be”), and f) analysis of current “artifacts” of science. It is argued that vigorous study along these lines could speed some industrial and governmental response to ongoing work on scientific frontiers.     

Sustainable energy prices and growth: Comparing macroeconomic and backcasting scenarios

How do results from the sustainability research world of backcasting relate to the macroeconomic scenarios used for policy evaluation and planning? The answer is that they don't, mostly — they come from different scientific traditions and are not used in the same contexts. Yet they often deal with the same issues. We believe that much can be gained by bringing the two systems of thinking together. This paper is a first attempt to do so, by making qualitative comparisons between different scenarios and highlighting benefits and limitations to each of them.Why are the pictures we get of the energy future so different if we use a macroeconomic model from when using a backcasting approach based on sustainable energy use? It is evident that the methods for producing those two kinds of scenarios differ a lot, but the main reason behind the different results are found in the starting points rather than in the methods. Baseline assumptions are quite different, as well as the interpretations and importance attached to signals about the future. In this paper, it is discussed how those two types of scenarios differ and how they approach issues such as energy prices and growth.The discussion is based on a comparison between Swedish economic and sustainability scenarios. The economic scenarios aim at being forecasts of the future and are used as decision support for long-term policies. But are the assumptions in the economic scenarios reasonable? The sustainability scenarios are explicitly normative backcasting scenarios. They do not take the issue of growth and consumption fully into account. Could they be developed in this respect? The comparison between the scenarios is also used to look closer at the issue of energy prices in a society with sustainable energy use. One of the questions raised is if a low energy society calls for high energy prices. Moreover, the effects of tradable permits versus energy taxes is analysed in the context of how energy use could be kept low in a growing economy.     

A systemic comparative assessment of the multifunctional performance of alternative olive systems in Spain within an AHP-extended framework

The concept of sustainable agriculture is strongly related to the multifunctional role, either explicitly or implicitly, recognized to the primary sector. When assessing the performance and value to society of particular agricultural systems, the multifunctional nature of agriculture requires an approach based on multicriteria. Amongst others, these include economic, environmental, social, cultural and technical criteria. Like other complex multicriteria analyses, this evaluation of agricultural systems is characterized by the existence of not only many, but often conflicting criteria, multiple stakeholders and decision-makers who have competing interests, lack of information and a consideration of the high risks involved.The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a methodology that deals with problems of this sort in a relatively easy, flexible and economical manner. Therefore it is a potentially useful tool for the practical resolution of complex problems, often an object of Ecological Economics. One such problem is the analysis of the sustainability of economic activities.This article has three aims. The first is to present AHP as a powerful methodology for assessing multifunctional performances of different agricultural systems in a comparative way. AHP can also be applied to other multifunctional economic activities. The second aim is to propose an extension of AHP for improving the decision-making processes when different groups of decision agents are involved. A final aim is to illustrate the AHP-extended methodology in a particular case study. This is done by using it to compare the multifunctional performance of alternative olive growing systems in Andalusia, a region located in the south of Spain, on the basis of the assessments of different groups of experts. This tests the hypothetically greater sustainability of organic and integrated farming over conventional farming systems in the medium/long term under average conditions for this region. Results for this case study show a greater global performance of organic and integrated agriculture despite differences in the ideological tendencies of the experts, thus providing a scientific basis for endorsing institutional and social support for the promotion and implementation of these farming techniques. Some conflictive issues, however, have been detected, especially in areas related to environmental performance. Further research on the controversial topics is desirable for clarification.     

Agricultural intensification, irrigation and the environment in South Asia: Issues and policy options

High population pressure and the rapid pace of human activity including urbanization, industrialization and other economic activities have led to a dwindling supply of arable land per capita and a process of agricultural intensification in South Asia. While this process has significantly increased food production to feed the growing population, it has also entailed considerable damage to the physical environment, including degradation and depletion of natural resources and unsustainable use of land and water resources. This paper employs the analytical tools of economic theory, environmental and ecological economics to model the impact of irrigation in South Asia. It underscores the need for an eclectic approach to policy responses stemming from private and common property rights theories, externality theory and sustainability theory with a view to environmentalizing agricultural development.     

区域可持续发展监测的方法学研究

对近年来国内外有关区域可持续发展监测的进展做了调研和分析,并选取宁波、广州、苏州、扬州以及三明和烟台等城市展开案例研究。从经济学、生态学、社会政治学和综合评价等出发讨论了4种监测方法,系统地提出了指标综合评价方法的基本步骤:指标的筛选、指标和数据的评估、指标体系的建立、数据的处理方法以及最终报告的撰写与发布,并介绍了研究中区域数据库的建立与评估软件的开发。案例研究的结果表明:资源损耗、环境损失、人均GDP是影响区域可持续发展的核心因子。对上述因子的定量核算,从多学科角度来综合评估监测区域可持续发展是必要的。     

Measures of the effects of agricultural practices on ecosystem services

Agriculture produces more than just crops. Agricultural practices have environmental impacts that affect a wide range of ecosystem services, including water quality, pollination, nutrient cycling, soil retention, carbon sequestration, and biodiversity conservation. In turn, ecosystem services affect agricultural productivity. Understanding the contribution of various agricultural practices to the range of ecosystem services would help inform choices about the most beneficial agricultural practices. To accomplish this, however, we must overcome a big challenge in measuring the impact of alternative agricultural practices on ecosystem services and of ecosystem services on agricultural production. A framework is presented in which such indicators can be interpreted as well as the criteria for selection of indicators. The relationship between agricultural practices and land-use change and erosion impact on chemical use is also discussed. Together these ideas form the basis for identifying useful indicators for quantifying the costs and benefits of agricultural systems for the range of ecosystem services interrelated to agriculture.     

Using the concept of yield to assess the sustainability of different tourist types

Sustainability assessments have become important tools for decision makers. This research assesses the sustainability of different types of tourists in New Zealand by using the concept of yield and by developing yield indicators in the areas of financial, public sector and sustainable yield. The concept and indicators have been developed in cooperation with the New Zealand tourism sector and therefore provide a sector-driven approach to implement a sustainability assessment. The analysis shows that there are numerous ‘trade-offs’ between indicators when attempting to define the ‘ideal visitor type’. Coach tourists, for example, are the largest spenders and generate the greatest Value Added in tourism on a per-day basis, but they contribute less to the financial sustainability of tourism when the costs of capital are accounted for. Coach tourists are highly concentrated in a few key destinations and at the same time produce substantial amounts of CO₂ emissions due to their air travel component. In contrast, backpacker and camping tourists provide greater financial yield and are more dispersed, but they are also the greatest user of publicly provided tourist attractions and therefore come at a higher cost to government than other tourist types. Camping tourists are also contributing considerably to CO₂ emissions. The yield analysis proposed in this paper could be a valuable tool for complex policy decision making and identifying strategies that lead to high-yield tourism.