The plurality of values in sustainable agriculture models: diverse lock-in and coevolution patterns

In Western economies, several agriculture models coexist. For instance, intensive agriculture organization, which has increased yields while causing major pollution and resource depletion, competes with alternative models, which tackle these sustainability issues and lead to lower yields. An agronomical typology of current agriculture models in Western societies is proposed that describes multiple sustainability issues through an agroecological perspective. However, in order to choose between these agroecological pathways, we must understand their social structure and the principles underlying them. Thus, our purpose is to characterize the institutional aspects of the alternative models using socioeconomic convention theory. We conducted a series of workshops with specialists in the natural sciences (agronomy, landscape ecology, and entomology) and social sciences (economics and sociology) to describe sustainable agriculture models. This characterization revealed the values underlying six different sustainable agriculture models, their forms of organization, and the institutions governing them. We discuss the implications of the coexistence of these six models in light of sustainable transition issues. From this coexistence perspective, transition (i) refers to an intertwined process of legitimation and disqualification, and (ii) means seeing pathways as the multiplicity and degree of interconnection between models. Therefore, we (i) identified the elements in each model that legitimize its mode of organization, and (ii) disqualified the elements that are incompatible with the principles underlying the model’s practices. Moreover, we emphasize that multiple transition pathways are possible based on complex, complementary combinations of different models. This revealed the intricate processes of competition and complementarity involving these models. Finally, our study on the coexistence, interdependence, and coevolution of multiple agriculture models led us to advocate a precautionary principle so that marginal innovative models are not prevented from emerging.

[1]  S. Hill Redesigning agroecosystems for environmental sustainability: a deep systems approach , 1998 .

[2]  R. Sonnino,et al.  Beyond the divide: rethinking relationships between alternative and conventional food networks in Europe , 2006 .

[3]  Adrian Smith,et al.  The politics of social-ecological resilience and sustainable socio-technical transitions , 2010 .

[4]  M. V. Asselt,et al.  More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy , 2001 .

[5]  T. Marsden Towards a real sustainable agri-food security and food policy: Beyond the ecological fallacies? , 2011 .

[6]  G. O'kane What is the real cost of our food? Implications for the environment, society and public health nutrition , 2011, Public Health Nutrition.

[7]  J. Edler,et al.  The Governance of Socio-Technical Systems: Explaining Change , 2014 .

[8]  L. Thevenot,et al.  Rules and implements: investment in forms , 1984 .

[9]  Terry Marsden,et al.  Towards the real green revolution? : Exploring the conceptual dimensions of a new ecological modernisation of agriculture that could 'feed the world' , 2011 .

[10]  Giorgos Kallis,et al.  Environmental innovation and societal transitions: Introduction and overview , 2011 .

[11]  M. Duru,et al.  Designing agroecological transitions; A review , 2015, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

[12]  L. Levidow,et al.  Divergent Paradigms of European Agro-Food Innovation , 2013 .

[13]  T. Benton,et al.  Relationships among multiple aspects of agriculture's environmental impact and productivity: a meta‐analysis to guide sustainable agriculture , 2017, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[14]  L. Ranjard,et al.  Understanding and managing soil biodiversity: a major challenge in agroecology , 2014, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

[15]  R. Norgaard Development betrayed: the end of progress and a coevolutionary revisioning of the future. , 1994 .

[16]  F. Chapin,et al.  A safe operating space for humanity , 2009, Nature.

[17]  J. Sanz-Cañada,et al.  Values, conventions, innovation and sociopolitical struggles in a local food system: Conflict between organic and conventional farmers in Sierra de Segura , 2017 .

[18]  G. Wilson From ‘weak’ to ‘strong’ multifunctionality: Conceptualising farm-level multifunctional transitional pathways , 2008 .

[19]  Huub Spiertz,et al.  Avenues to meet food security. The role of agronomy on solving complexity in food production and resource use , 2012 .

[20]  E. Justes,et al.  How to implement biodiversity-based agriculture to enhance ecosystem services: a review , 2015, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

[21]  B. Popkin,et al.  Ultra‐processed products are becoming dominant in the global food system , 2013, Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity.

[22]  N. Marshall,et al.  Informing adaptation responses to climate change through theories of transformation , 2012 .

[23]  L. Marini,et al.  Conservation tillage mitigates the negative effect of landscape simplification on biological control , 2016 .

[24]  T. Marsden From post-productionism to reflexive governance: Contested transitions in securing more sustainable food futures , 2013 .

[25]  Scott Frickel,et al.  Hurricane Katrina, contamination, and the unintended organization of ignorance , 2007 .

[26]  M. Jeuffroy,et al.  Why are grain-legumes rarely present in cropping systems despite their environmental and nutritional benefits? Analyzing lock-in in the French agrifood system , 2016 .

[27]  S. Gliessman Agroecology: The Ecology of Sustainable Food Systems , 2007 .

[28]  F. Geels The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms , 2011 .

[29]  F. Geels,et al.  Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways , 2007 .

[30]  S. Ulgiati,et al.  A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems , 2016 .

[31]  T. Ricketts,et al.  Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture , 2007 .

[32]  Anne D. Bjorkman,et al.  Increasing homogeneity in global food supplies and the implications for food security , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[33]  S. Ponte Convention Theory in the Anglophone Agro-food Literature: Past, Present and Future , 2016 .

[34]  M. Altieri,et al.  Agroecology, Food Sovereignty, and the New Green Revolution , 2012 .

[35]  B. Müller,et al.  Ecologists Should Care about Insurance, too. , 2016, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[36]  Massimo Marraffa,et al.  Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice , 1998 .

[37]  S. McGuire,et al.  Seed exchange networks for agrobiodiversity conservation. A review , 2012, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.