From GFM@age2.age.uiuc.edu Wed Mar 9 23:53:04 1994 Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 19:56:08 CST From: Greg McIsaac To: SANET-MG@ces.ncsu.edu Subject: DISCUSSION: Sust. ag. definition Saneters- Below is my analysis and discussion of various definitions of sustainable agriculture that have been offered in published literature (1978- 1992). Given that all definitions are politically motivated to some degree, my concern is not so much with coming up with the one, true, universal definition. I am more concerned with finding common ground among diverse constituencies which might help develop a formidable and lasting coalition to promote an agriculture that is worth sustaining. This is part of a chapter that will appear later this year in volume titled "Sustainable Agriculture in the American Midwest: Lessons from the Past, Prospects for the Future" published by the University of Illinois Press, edited by myself and W. R. Edwards. Sustainable Agricultue needs to be a part of a sustainable society, and various ideas about that are discussed elsewhere in this chapter. I am basically sympathetic with the ideas of Herman Daly and John Cobb (For the Common Good) who argue for a steady state economy that improves qualitiatively. We also need to figure out in qualitative and quantitative terms, the human carying capacity of ecological systems on local and global scales. Best Regards, Greg McIsaac Sustainability of Agriculture Wes Jackson, geneticist and co-founder of the Land Institute, was probably the first to use the term "sustainable agriculture" in recent times (Jackson, 1978). Since natural ecosystems have stood the test of time, Jackson argued, they should serve as models for sustainable agriculture. His proposal for a sustainable agriculture in the North American plains consists of perennial seed crops modeled after the prairie ecosystem. Permanent ground cover would decrease soil erosion; tillage and planting would occur infrequently and require little energy. He initiated a research program to develop perennial seed bearing crops for human and animal consumption as well as for energy production. As the concept of sustainability became more widely accepted, several complementary and competing definitions and strategies for sustainable agriculture have been offered. Gordon Douglass (1984) described three major themes in the sustainable agriculture literature: sustainability as food sufficiency, as stewardship of the earth, and as community. According to Douglass, these themes seem to be promoted by three different constituencies. Those who argue for sustainability as food sufficiency tend to see the sole or primary function of agriculture as providing abundant food for growing populations. The U.S. Land Grant Colleges of Agriculture have a long history of research and eduction geared to increased agricultural productivity (Busch and Lacy, 1983), and representatives of these institutions commonly frame the discussion on sustainability in terms of increased productivity (Holt, 1988; Hoeft and Nafziger, 1988; Ruttan, 1989). The second group, who Douglass identifies with "stewardship," argue from an ecological point of view for maintaining the Earth's biological systems by preserving wild land and biodiversity, closing energy and nutrient cycles, and slowing and eventually stopping human population growth. Some who might fit into this category might argue against the anthropocentric overtones of the term "stewardship." Those concerned with sustainability as community see agriculture as an important cultural activity which provides meaning, cultivates moral responsibility, and continues traditions of caring for the earth and future generations (Burkhardt, 1989). Various professional societies and interest groups have offered definitions of sustainable agriculture which address all three elements identified by Douglass. For example, the American Society of Agronomy developed the following definition of sustainable agriculture: A sustainable agriculture is one that, over the long term, enhances the environmental quality and the resource base on which agriculture depends; provides for basic human food and fiber needs; is economically viable; and enhances the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole. (Francis and Youngberg, 1990). Economist Pierre Crosson (1992) contends that "a sustainable agriculture is one that can indefinitely meet the needs for food and fiber at socially acceptable economic and environmental costs." Crosson views knowledge as the key for attaining sustainability and calls for a concerted research effort to expand agricultural production while becoming less dependent on fossil fuels and more friendly to the environment. Like economist Richard Norgaard, ecologist Stephen Gliessman (1990) argues for a coevolutionary approach to understanding sustainable agriculture: Agricultural systems develop as a result of the coevolution that occurs between culture and environment, and a truly sustainable agriculture values humans as well as the ecological components...Our understanding of ecosystem level processes should interface with the even more complex aspects of the social, economic and political systems within which agroecosystems function. (Gliessman, 1990) Gliessman proposes that the sustainability of agricultural systems can be assessed, like natural ecosystems, by examining their energy flows, nutrient cycles, population regulation mechanisms and dynamic equilibria. Qualitative and quantitative indicators of agricultural sustainability may emerge from careful analysis of regional and site specific social and agro-ecological relationships over time. Furthermore, Patricia Allen, working in collaboration with Stephen Gliessman and others (1991), argues that much of the discussion of sustainable agriculture has been overly focused on farm-level production and profitability. They propose that "sustainable agriculture is one that equitably balances concerns of environmental soundness, economic viability and social justice among all sectors of society." Such a definition would bring issues such as urban poverty and hunger into the discussion of sustainable agriculture. Interestingly, Donald Holt (1989), Director of the Illinois Agricultural Experiment and generally an advocate of the productivity paradigm, suggested that any proposals for increasing agricultural sustainability should be assessed for its impacts on low income groups. Since the poor spend a greater percentage of their income on food, any efforts to increase agricultural sustainability that increases food prices will harm the poor disproportionately. This claim should be carefully assessed for accuracy, since malnutrition in the US is still unacceptably widespread in spite of high agricultural productivity. However, an important point relative to the discussion of different conceptions of sustainable agriculture is that those emphasizing sustainable agriculture as community and those emphasizing food sufficiency through increased productivity both claim at times to act in the best interest of least advantaged members of society. Unfortunately, the environmental movement in the US has been justifiably criticized for its lack of attention to the agendas and concerns of racial minorities and low income groups (Bullard, 1990). Furthermore, there is some anthropological evidence to suggest that in some ways environmentalism may be part of an attempt (perhaps unconscious) by an upwardly mobile middle class to separate itself from what it considers lower and inferior classes of people who are in need of reform (Frykman and Lofgren, 1987). However, there appears to be a growing movement toward environmental justice (Bullard, 1990) and if those emphasizing preservation of ecosystems are willing to expand their agenda to accommodate (or even champion) concerns of the least advantaged members of the society, then the three groups identified by Douglass will have this common goal sustainable agriculture. Perhaps focusing on the needs of the least advantaged members of society can be a constructive starting point for the diverse constituencies that claim interest in the sustainability of agriculture to build a formidable and lasting coalition. However, creating a decision making process that can fairly resolve disputes over equity is one of the most profound challenges facing agriculture (Allen et al., 1991). A Possible Consensus There appears to be some agreement that sustainability ought to be understood through a coevolutionary perspective in which humans should not cause irreversible changes in ecological processes or degradation of the natural resource base. Furthermore, sustainable agriculture should encourage and preserve cultural traditions which equitably balance social justice, environmental soundness and economic viability among all sectors of the society. This concept may become elaborated or change radically as our understanding of ecological processes and social impacts change. In the meantime, we can minimize our collective impact on the environment by implementing cultural, organizational and technological changes, such as reducing consumption, carefully examining the bases and consequences of our value systems, and developing technologies for utilizing renewable resources in an efficient and sustainable manner. References Allen, P, D. Van Dusen, J. Lundy and S. Gliessman. 1991. Integrating social, environmental, and economic issues in sustainable agriculture. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 6(1):34-39. Burkhardt, J. The morality behind sustainability. 1989. Journal of Agricultural Ethics 2:113-128. Busch, L and W.B. Lacy. 1983. Science, Agriculture and the Politics of Research. Westview Press, Boulder, CO. 303pp. Crosson, P. R. 1992. Sustainable Agriculture. Resources, Winter: 14-17. Dahlberg, K.A. 1991. Sustainable agriculture - fad or harbinger? Bioscience 41(5):337-339. Douglass, G.K. (ed) Agricultural Sustainability in a Changing World Order. 1984. Westview Press, Boulder, CO. Francis, C.A. and G. Youngberg. 1990. Sustainable Agriculture - an overview. In: Francis, C.A., C.B. Flora, and L.D. King (Eds.) Sustainable Agriculture in Temperate Zones, John Wiley and Sons, New York. p 1-23. Frykman, J., and O. Lofgren. 1987. Culture Builders: A Historical Anthropology of Middle Class Life. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ. 321 p. Gliessman, S.R. 1990. Agroecology: Researching the Ecological Basis for Sustainable Agriculture. Springer-Verlag. New York. 380 pp. Hoeft, R.G. and E.D. Nafziger. Sustainable Agriculture. Better Crops with Plant Food 72(2):9-11. Holt, D. 1989. Love affair with LISA. Better Crops with Plant Food. 73(3):4-7. Jackson, W. 1978. Toward a sustainable agriculture. Not Man Apart, December, p 4-6. Jackson, W. 1990. Making sustainable agriculture work. In: Clark, R. Our Sustainable Table. Northpoint Press, Berkley, CA. pp132- 141. Norgaard, R. 1988. Sustainable development: A co-evolutionary view. Futures: the journal of forecasting and planning (6): 606-20. Ruttan, V. W. 1989. Sustainability is not enough. Better Crops with Plant Food 73(2):6-9. Schneiderman, H.A. and W.D. Carpenter. 1990. Planetary patriotism: sustainable agriculture for the future. Environmental Science and Technology 24(4):466-473. Strange, M. 1988. Family Farming A New Economic Vision. University of Nebraska Press, and Institute for Food and Development Policy, San Francisco, 311 pp. Thompson, P.B. 1988. Ethical dilemmas in agriculture: the need for recognition and resolution. Agriculture and Human Values 5(3)4-15.