Green Agriculture - Agroecology in Action

15 Pages·2011·0.36 MB·English

This article was downloaded by: [University of California, Berkeley]
On: 17 November 2011, At: 08:12
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Agricultural
Sustainability
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tags20
Green Agriculture: foundations for
biodiverse, resilient and productive
agricultural systems
Parviz Koohafkan a , Miguel A. Altieri b & Eric Holt Gimenez c
a Land and Water Division, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the
United Nations, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153, Rome, Italy
b College of Natural Resources, University of California, Berkeley, CA,
94720, USA
c Institute for Food and Development Policy (Food First), Oakland, CA,
94618, USA
Available online: 17 Nov 2011
To cite this article: Parviz Koohafkan, Miguel A. Altieri & Eric Holt Gimenez (2011): Green Agriculture:
foundations for biodiverse, resilient and productive agricultural systems, International Journal of Agricultural
Sustainability, DOI:10.1080/14735903.2011.610206
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2011.610206
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial
or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the
contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae,
and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not
be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this
material.
1
1
0
2
r
e
b
m
e
v
o
N
7
1
2
1
8:
0
at
]
y
e
el
k
r
e
B
a,
ni
r
o
f
ali
C
f
o
y
sit
r
e
v
ni
U
[
y
b
d
e
d
a
o
nl
w
o
D
Green Agriculture: foundations for
biodiverse, resilient and productive
agricultural systems
1
1
0
2
er Parviz Koohafkan1, Miguel A. Altieri2* and Eric Holt Gimenez3
b
m
e 1LandandWaterDivision,FoodandAgricultureOrganization(FAO)oftheUnitedNations,VialedelleTermediCaracalla,
v
o 00153Rome,Italy
N
17 23CInosltlietugteeofofrNFaotuordalaRnedsDoeuvrceelosp,mUneinvtePrsoitlyicyof(FCoaolidfoFrnirisat,),BOerakkelalenyd,,CCAA9944762108,,UUSSAA
2
1
8: Therearemanyvisionsonhowtoachieveasustainableagriculturethatprovidesenoughfoodandecosystemservices
0
at for present and future generations in an era of climate change, increasing costs of energy, social unrest, financial
] instability and increasing environmental degradation. New agricultural systems that are able to confront the
y
e challengesofarapidlychangingworldrequireaminimumoftenattributesthatconstitutethedefiningelementsofa
el
k GreenAgriculture.Amajorchallengeistoidentifyasetofthresholdsthatanyagriculturalproductionstrategymust
r
Be meet, beyond which unsustainable trends caused by the farming technologies would lead to tipping-point
a, phenomena. Only those styles of agriculture that meet the established threshold criteria while advancing rural
ni communities towards food, energy and technological sovereignty would be considered viable forms of Green
r
o
f Agriculture. Considering the diversity of ecological, socio-economic, historical and political contexts in which
Cali agricultural systems have developed and are evolving in, it is only wise to define a set of flexible and locally
f adaptableprinciplesandboundariesofsustainabilityandresiliencyfortheagroecosystemsoftheimmediatefuture.
o
sity Keywords:foodsovereignty;globalagriculture;sustainability;thresholds
r
e
v
ni
U
[
y
d b Introduction agricultural sector has been largely successful in
de providing for an increasing and wealthier global
a
o There are several approaches on how to enhance population (Royal Society, 2009). The rate of
nl
w agricultural yields, ranging from expanding into growth in total factor productivity in agriculture
o
D new land to increasing the yield per hectare via has exceeded the population growth rate, although
higher input use or genetic modification or increas- in some countries and regions such as Africa, the
ingtheoutputperunitofinputssuchaswater,nitro- productivity has been low.
gen or phosphorus (NRC, 2010). Intensification of Today,mostfoodandagricultureexpertsagreethat
agriculture via the use of high-yielding crop var- foodproductionwillhavetoincreasesubstantiallyby
ieties, fertilization, irrigation and pesticides has con- 2050 (Godfray et al., 2010). Almost 90 per cent of
tributed substantially to the increases in food theprojected70percentincreasesinfoodproduction
production over the last 50 years. The food and are expected to come from intensification, including
*Correspondingauthor.Email:[email protected]
INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAGRICULTURALSUSTAINABILITYiFirstarticle2011
PAGES1–13, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2011.610206 #2011Taylor&FrancisGroup|anInformabusiness.ISSN:1473-5903(print),1747-762X(online).www.tandfonline.com/tags
2 P. Koohafkan, M. A.Altieriand E. H.Gimenez
zones where land and water are already scarce. The requirements of a sustainable
But matters become complicated as the rates of agriculture
growthofagriculturalproductionhavebeendeclining
and the competition for scarce land and water InhisreporttotheUNHumanRightsCouncil,theUN
resources shows no sign of relaxing. Lately, the SpecialRapporteurontherighttofoodstatedthatin
growing volatility of food prices has severely order to take effective measures towards the realiz-
impacted on the world’s poor, most notably during ation of the right to food, food systems must ensure
the food price peaks of 2007–2008 (Holt-Gimenez the availability of food for everyone, warning,
andPatel,2009). however, that increasing food production to meet
The relationship between agricultural intensifica- future needs, while necessary, is not sufficient. The
tion, natural resources management and socio- report stressed the fact that agriculture must develop
1
1 economic development is complex, as production in ways that increase the incomes of smallholders
0
r 2 activities impact heavily on natural resources and of poor consumers as hunger is caused not by
e
b with serious health and environmental impli- low food stocks but by poverty. It also emphasized
m
e cations. When the petroleum dependence and the that agriculture must not compromise its ability to
v
o ecological risks of industrial agriculture are satisfyfutureneedsbyunderminingbiodiversityand
N
7 accounted for, serious questions about the social, the natural resource base. The report highlights the
1
2 economic and environmental sustainability of potential of agroecology as the best approach to
1
8: certain agricultural strategies arise (IAASTD, movetowardstherealizationoftherighttoadequate
0
at 2009). foodinitsdifferentdimensions:availability,accessi-
] Unless the footprints of agriculture are carefully bility, adequacy, sustainability and participation (de
y
ele reduced through improved agroecological manage- Schutter,2010).
rk ment, both agricultural systems and remaining Althoughthereisnoconsensusonaparticulardefi-
e
B natural ecosystems will suffer further degradation, nition of sustainable agriculture, promoting a new
nia, thus increasing the proportion of the world’s species agricultural production paradigm in order to ensure
or threatened with extinction and further limiting the the production of abundant, healthy and affordable
f
ali ecosystem services provided by agriculture for food for an increasing human population is an
C
f humankind(Perfectoetal.,2009).Anadditionalcom- urgent and unavoidable task. This challenge will
o
y plication is that most modern monoculture systems have to be met using environmentally friendly and
sit are particularly vulnerable to climate change and socially equitable technologies and methods, in a
r
ve little has been done to enhance their adaptability to world with a shrinking arable land base (which is
Uni changing patterns of precipitation, temperature and also being diverted to produce biofuels), with less
y [ extreme weather events (Rosenzweig and Hillel, and more expensive petroleum, increasingly limited
b
d 2008). This realization has led many experts to supplies of water and nitrogen and within a scen-
e
d suggest that the use of ecologically based manage- ario of a rapidly changing climate, social unrest
a
o mentstrategiesmayincreasetheproductivity,sustain- and economic uncertainty (IAASTD, 2009). The
nl
w ability and resilience of agricultural production only agricultural system that will be able to con-
o
D while reducing undesirable impacts (Altieri, 2002; front future challenges is one that will exhibit
deSchutter,2010). high levels of diversity, productivity and efficiency
Therefore, a key challenge for the future in the (top left quadrant in Figure 1, Funes-Monzote,
management of agroecosystems lies in increasing 2009). To transform agricultural production so
the efficiency of resource use in order to ensure that it not only produces abundant food but also
increased production and conservation of biodiver- becomes a major contributor to global biodiversity
sity and scarce natural resources, while building in conservation and a continuing source of redistribu-
resilience in agroecosystems in the face of increas- tive ecosystem and socio-economic services is
ing climate-related hazards, biotic stresses and unquestionably a key endeavour for both scientists
economic shocks (Tilman et al., 2002, Pretty and farmers in the second decade of the 21st
et al., 2011). century (Godfray et al., 2010).
INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAGRICULTURALSUSTAINABILITY
GreenAgriculture 3
continuously improve performance over time to
reach sustainability targets. During an analysis of
this initiative, researchers selected 10 sustainability
indicators for various crops (peas, spinach, toma-
toes, tea and oil palm) in 11 countries to assess
progress towards the sustainable supply of these
crops (Pretty et al., 2008b). Apparently, these
assessments have been important for Unilever in
developing a more mature approach to measuring
and monitoring agricultural sustainability.
However, due to methodological and institutional
1
1 constraints, multi-indicator, multi-year monitoring
0
2
r programmes as originally envisaged are unlikely
e
b to be applicable to whole product supply chains
m
ve Figure1|Featuresofgreenagroecosystemsofthefuture: in the short term.
o The idea behind establishing a set of agronomic,
N productivity,diversity,integrationandefficiency
17 Source:Funes-Monzote(2009). ecological,social,economicandenvironmentalstan-
2 dardsisthatifcontractedproducersfollowsuchstan-
1
8: dardstheyshouldbeabletopromoteamoreefficient
0
at Standards for sustainable agriculture, biodiversity conservation and benefit
y] agriculture their communities. The use of the standards and the
e
el auditingofsuchstandardsshouldfosterbestmanage-
k
r Several sustainable agriculture standard-setting ment practices that support sustainability and resili-
e
B initiativesareunderwayaimingatestablishingacom- ence. Compliance is evaluated by audits conducted
a,
ni prehensive,continuousimprovementframeworkwith by authorized inspection and/or certification bodies
or acommonsetofeconomic,environmentalandsocial that measure the degree of the farm’s conformity to
f
ali metrics to determine whether an agricultural system the environmental and social norms indicated in the
C
f is being managed in a sustainable manner (e.g. the standard’scriteria.Asa toolthemethodisusefulfor
o
y sustainable agriculture standard of the Leonardo companies and associated farmers interested in miti-
sit Academy (2007) and the Global Bioenergy Partner- gating environmental and social risks caused by
r
e
v ship, 2010). In addition, several agricultural enter- their agricultural activities through a process that
ni
U prises interested in implementing a sustainability motivatescontinualimprovement,aswellasprovide
[
y programme are engaged in developing a self- a measure of each farm’s social and environmental
b
d assessment protocol of their particular agricultural performance and best management practices. For
e
d operations. The main idea is for the enterprise pro- example,theRainforestAlliance(2007)developeda
a
o moting an agricultural development or business series of standards that cover the environmental,
nl
w model to find ways to implement the sustainability social, labour and agronomic management of farms.
o
D plan in order to assess its goals and use methods The Rainforest Alliance certification is built on the
that improve its performance in the environmental three pillars of sustainability: environmental protec-
and economic spheres. Several companies have tion, social equity and economic viability. Among
developed their own sustainable agriculture code the trends expected in tropical farms that follow the
and ask their suppliers, and the farmers who standards are less soil erosion, pollution and waste,
supply them, to adopt sustainable practices on enhanced habitat for wildlife, reduced threats to
their farms. For example, Unilever adopted a human health and improved conditions for farm
series of agricultural sustainability principles workers.
(Pretty et al., 2008a) and expects all their suppliers Recently, Conservation International and the Bill
of agricultural raw materials to commit to andMelindaGatesFoundationconvenedaworkshop
minimum standards of performance and to to create a network for the global monitoring of
INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAGRICULTURALSUSTAINABILITY
4 P. Koohafkan, M. A.Altieriand E. H.Gimenez
agriculture, ecosystem services and livelihoods. The leaves the costs of remediation and conversion to
goal of the network will be to provide a system for the farmers to meet the certification standards
integrated measurement and analysis of agriculture’s while the enterprises usually continue paying the
human well-being and environmental outcomes to same prices for products. Many farmers linked to
ensure that agricultural development is sustainable local and regional markets, constrained by standards
(Conservation International, 2011). They proposed a tailored for export agriculture, have opted for other
groupofthreetypesofmetricandsyntheticindicators types of certification programmes, such as the parti-
to be used during the agricultural intensification cipatory certification of the Rede Ecovida in
process: southern Brazil (Dos Santos and Mayer, 2007).
Ecovida consists of a space of articulation between
1. a set of indicators to identify areas suitable either organized family farmers, supportive NGOs and
1
1 forintensificationorforecosystemservices; consumers whoseobjectiveistopromoteagroecolo-
0
2
r 2. indicatorstoassesstheperformanceoftheintensi- gical alternatives and develop solidarious markets
e
b ficationprocess; that tighten the circle between local producers and
m
e 3. situational awareness indicators to capture consumers, ensuring local food security and that
v
o the different dimensions of impact of the generated wealth remains in the community
N
7 intensification. (Van der Ploeg, 2009).
1
2
1
8: Anapparentdrawbackofthisproposalisthatitident-
0
at ifies intensification (increase the production per area Basic attributes and goals of a
y] viatheefficientuseofinputs)astheonlyagricultural ‘Green Agriculture’
e
el path for agricultural production, disregarding the
k
r diversity of other agroecological approaches that, Therearemanycompetingvisionsonhowtoachieve
e
B instead of intensification, emphasize diversification, newmodelsofabiodiverse,resilient,productiveand
a,
ni synergies and recycling. The methodology also resource-efficient agriculture that humanity despe-
r
o creates a dichotomy between areas for agriculture rately needs in the immediate future. Conservation
f
ali and areas for nature, ignoring the fact that there are (noorminimumtillage)agriculture,sustainableinten-
C
f forms of agriculture (notably smallholder diversified sification production, transgenic crops, organic agri-
o
y farms)thatsimultaneouslyproducefoodandconserve culture and agroecological systems are some of the
sit biodiversity and associated ecosystem services proposed approaches, each claiming to serve as the
r
e
v (Perfectoetal.,2009). durablefoundationforasustainablefoodproduction
ni
U While such principles and standards are of great strategy. Although the goals of all approaches may
[
y importance for assessing the sustainability of agri- be similar, technologies-proposed (high- versuslow-
b
d cultural operations, groups engaged in such pro- input) methodologies (farmer led versus market
e
d cesses have encountered great difficulty in arriving driven) and scales (large-scale monocultures versus
a
nlo at agreement on criteria, let alone standards; there- biodiverse small farms) are quite different and often
w fore, a number of shortcomings persist and the antagonistic. With more than a billion hungry
o
D application of standards remains rather limited. peopleontheplanetandfutureclimateandeconomic
Some people believe that the imposition of general disruptionsimmanent,thereisanurgentneedforthe
and rigid standards that may not fit within the spe- entire development community to work together to
cificities of each agricultural region can actually design and scale up truly sustainable agricultural
inhibit the diversity of agricultural production systems.
approaches and be counterproductive to the evol- A starting point is to agree on the basic attributes
ution of sustainable agriculture. Others argue that that a sustainable production system should exhibit.
the science underpinning such an audit is still not Criteria derived from the extensive literature on
in place. Another problem with many certification agroecology and sustainable agriculture suggest a
schemes is that they judge the farmer rather than series of attributes (Table 1) that any agricultural
the technologies promoted and in most cases it system should exhibit in order to be considered
INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAGRICULTURALSUSTAINABILITY
GreenAgriculture 5
sustainable (Gliessman, 1998; Altieri, 2002; UK
Table 1|Basic attributes of sustainable agricultural
Food Group, 2010). Most researchers agree that a
systems
basic attribute is the maintenance of agroecosystem
1. Useoflocalandimprovedcropvarietiesand
diversity and the ecological services derived from
livestockbreedssoastoenhancegeneticdiversity
beneficial ecological interactions among crops,
andenhanceadaptationtochangingbioticand
animals and soils. Increasingly, research suggests
environmentalconditions
that the level of internal regulation of function in
2. Avoidtheunnecessaryuseofagrochemicaland
agroecosystems is largely dependent on the level
othertechnologiesthatadverselyimpactonthe
of plant and animal biodiversity present in the
environmentandonhumanhealth(e.g.heavy
system and its surrounding environment (Altieri
machineries,transgeniccrops,etc.)
and Nicholls, 2004). Biodiversity performs a
11 3. Efficientuseofresources(nutrients,water, variety of ecological services beyond the production
20 energy,etc.),reduceduseofnon-renewable
er energyandreducedfarmerdependenceon of food, including recycling of nutrients, regulation
b of microclimate and local hydrological processes,
m externalinputs
e suppression of undesirable organisms, detoxification
v
o 4. Harnessagroecologicalprincipalsandprocesses of noxious chemicals, etc. (Figure 2). Because
N
suchasnutrientcycling,biologicalnitrogenfixation,
7 biodiversity-mediated renewal processes and eco-
1 allelopathy,biologicalcontrolviapromotionof
12 diversifiedfarmingsystemsandharnessing logical services are largely biological, their persist-
8: functionalbiodiversity ence depends on the maintenance of biological
0
at 5. Makingproductiveuseofhumancapitalintheform integrity and diversity in agroecosystems. Tra-
] ditional farmers as well as a generation of agroecol-
y oftraditionalandmodernscientificknowledgeand
e
el skillstoinnovateandtheuseofsocialcapital ogistsofferawidearrayofmanagementoptionsand
k
er throughrecognitionofculturalidentity,participatory designs that enhance functional biodiversity in crop
B methodsandfarmernetworkstoenhancesolidarity fields (Uphoff, 2002; Altieri and Koohafkan, 2008;
nia, andexchangeofinnovationsandtechnologiesto Toledo and Barrera-Bassals, 2009).
or resolveproblems Another way of exploring the potential sustain-
f
ali 6. Reducetheecologicalfootprintofproduction, ability of particular agricultural interventions in
C
f distributionandconsumptionpractices,thereby addressing pressing concerns is to establish a set
o
y minimizingGHGemissionsandsoilandwater of questions (Table 2) that examine whether or not
sit pollution current management practices are contributing to
r
e
v 7. Promotingpracticesthatenhancecleanwater sustainable livelihoods by improving natural,
ni
U availability,carbonsequestration,conservationof human, social, physical and financial capital. In
y [ biodiversity,soilandwaterconservation,etc. this regard, many organizations (notably the Inter-
b
d 8. Enhancedadaptivecapacitybasedonthe national Fund for Agricultural Development and
e
d premisethatthekeytocopingwithrapidand UK’s Overseas Development Institute) have pro-
a
nlo unforeseeablechangeistostrengthentheabilityto moted the sustainable livelihoods approach. This
w adequatelyrespondtochangetosustainabalance tool provides an analytical framework that promotes
o
D betweenlong-termadaptabilityandshort-term systematic analysis of the underlying processes and
efficiency
causes of poverty, food insecurity and environ-
9. Strengthenadaptivecapacityandresilienceofthe mental degradation. Although it is not the only
farmingsystembymaintainingagroecosystem such framework, its advantages are that it focuses
diversity,whichnotonlyallowsvariousresponses attention on people’s own definitions of poverty,
tochange,butalsoensureskeyfunctionson
food security, etc. and takes into account a wide
thefarm
range of factors that cause or contribute to commu-
10. Recognitionanddynamicconservationof nity problems. These are shown schematically in a
agriculturalheritagesystemsthatallowssocial framework that identifies the state of the capitals,
cohesionandasenseofprideandpromoteasense
the threats and the livelihood outcomes, enabling
ofbelongingandreducemigration
multiple stakeholder perspectives to be taken into
INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAGRICULTURALSUSTAINABILITY
6 P. Koohafkan, M. A.Altieriand E. H.Gimenez
1
1
0
2
r
e
b
m
e
v
o
N
7
1
2
1
8:
at 0 Figure 2|The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystem function and the provision of ecosystem services by
] diversifiedfarmingsystems
y
e
el
k
r account in the identification of practical priorities policy agendas, while their performance assessment
e
B for action to confront the threats and enhance the remains an important challenge. Many authors have
a,
ni capitals (Scoones, 2008). developed methods to evaluate the ecological, econ-
or omic and social sustainability of particular forms of
f
ali agriculture at the farm level, estimating the pro-
C
f Defining indicators to assess the ductivity,stability,resilienceandadaptabilityofpar-
o
y sustainability of agricultural ticularproductionsystems(HansenandJones,1996;
sit systems VanderWerfandPetit,2002).
r
e
v How does a given strategy impact on the overall
ni
U Agriculturalsystems – eventhemosttraditionalones – sustainability of the natural resource management
[
y arenotstaticsystems;infacttheyareconstantlychan- system?Whatistheappropriateapproachtoexplore
b
d ging over time. The major forces that shape current the economic, environmental and social dimensions
e
d agricultural changes are: population increase and of farming systems? How can the sustainability of
a
nlo dynamics, global market forces, investment in agri- an agroecosystem be evaluated? These are unavoid-
w culture and rural sector, important advances in able questions faced by scientists and development
o
D scienceandtechnology,climaticchangeandvariabil- practitioners dealing with complex agroecosystems
ity,consumerdemands,agriculturalsubsidiesandthe inarapidlychangingworld.
pressures from social movements demanding food Atthefarmlevelamajortaskistoidentifyindicators
sovereignty, land reform and poverty reduction. that signal performance or specific management pro-
Only food and agricultural policies and practices blems or identify undesirable environmental changes
that are capable of responding adequately to these andwhatactiontotake.Thefocusisonchangingprac-
forces have the possibility of being sustainable in a ticesatthefarmscaleinawaylikelytoimproveoverall
rapidlychangingworld. farm health (Rigby et al.,2001). Thereismuchargu-
The design of agroecosystems that exhibit many ment on whether to use location-specific or universal
of the attributes of sustainability (see Table 1) has indicators. Some argue that the important indicators
becomealeadingobjectiveofscientificresearchand of sustainability are location specific and vary
INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAGRICULTURALSUSTAINABILITY
GreenAgriculture 7
maybemorerelevant.Althoughusuallyeachindicator
Table 2|A set of guiding questions to assess if
deals with one aspect of sustainability, a complete
proposed agricultural systems are contributing to
sustainablelivelihoods assessment of a farming system should include
severalindicatorvalues,butinsteadofbeingpresented
1. Aretheyreducingpoverty?
separately,theyareintegratedtoprovideamoreholis-
2. Aretheybasedonrightsandsocialequity? tic evaluation of socio-economic, agronomic and
environmental dimensions (Castoldi and Bechini,
3. Dotheyreducesocialexclusion,particularlyfor
women,minoritiesandindigenouspeople? 2010).
A strong current of opinion believes that the defi-
4. Dotheyprotectaccessandrightstoland,waterand
nitionandconsequentlytheprocedureformeasuring
othernaturalresources?
sustainable agriculture is the same regardless of the
1
1 5. Dotheyfavourtheredistribution(ratherthanthe diversity of situations that prevails on different
0
2 concentration)ofproductiveresources?
r farms. Under this principle, sustainability is defined
e
b 6. Dotheysubstantiallyincreasefoodproductionand by a set of requirements that must be met by any
m
e contributetohouseholdfoodsecurityandimproved farmregardlessofthewidedifferencesintheprevail-
v
o nutrition? ing situation (Harrington, 1992). The procedure of
N
7 7. Dotheyenhancefamilies’wateraccessand using a common set of indicators offers a protocol
1
2 availability? for measuring sustainability at the farm level by:
1
08: 8. Dotheyregenerateandconservesoil,andincrease defining the requirements for sustainability and then
at (maintain)soilfertility? selecting a common set of indicators to assess
] whether the requirements are met. According to
y
e 9. Dotheyreducesoilloss/degradationandenhance
kel soilregenerationandconservation? mostmethods,afarmingsystemisconsideredsustain-
r ableifitconservesthenaturalresourcebaseandcon-
e
B 10. Dopracticesmaintainorenhanceorganicmatter tinues to satisfy the needs of the farmer in the long
nia, andthebiologicallifeandbiodiversityofthesoil? term. Any system that fails to satisfy these two
or 11. Dotheypreventpestanddiseaseoutbreaks? requirements is bound to degrade significantly over
f
ali the short term and is therefore considered to be not
C 12. Dotheyconserveandencourageagrobiodiversity?
f sustainable.
o
y 13. Dotheyreducegreenhousegasemissions? The Indicator-based Framework for Evaluation of
rsit 14. Dotheyincreaseincomeopportunitiesand Natural Resource Management Systems (MESMIS)
e
v employment? proposes an integrated interdisciplinary approach to
ni
U assess sustainability of farming systems (Lopez-
[ 15. Dotheyreducevariationinagriculturalproduction
y underclimaticstressconditions? Ridaura et al., 2002). The framework is applicable
b
d withinthefollowingparameters:
e 16. Dotheyenhancefarmdiversificationandresilience?
d
a
nlo 17. Dotheyreduceinvestmentcostsandfarmers 1. Sustainability of natural resource management
w dependenceonexternalinputs? systemsisdefinedbysevengeneralattributes:pro-
o
D ductivity, stability, reliability, resilience, adapta-
18. Dotheyincreasethedegreeandeffectivenessof
bility,equityandself-reliance.
farmerorganizations?
2. The assessment is only valid for a management
19. Dotheyincreasehumancapitalformation?
system in a given geographical location, spatial
20. Dotheycontributetolocal/regionalfood scale (e.g. parcel, production unit, community,
sovereignty? etc.)anddeterminedinatimeperiod.
3. Itisaparticipatoryprocessrequiringaninterdisci-
between ecoregions. For example, on hillsides, soil plinary evaluation team. The evaluation team
erosion has a major impact on sustainability, but in usuallyincludesoutsidersandlocalparticipants.
the flat lowlands, this is insignificant and may not be 4. Sustainability is not measured per se, but is
a useful indicator; rather soil organic matter content measuredthroughthecomparisonoftwoormore
INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAGRICULTURALSUSTAINABILITY
8 P. Koohafkan, M. A.Altieriand E. H.Gimenez
systems. The comparison is made either cross- natural capital of each farming system being evalu-
sectionally (e.g. comparing an alternative and a ated. The asymmetry of the AMOEBA indicates the
reference system at the same time) or longitudin- extent to which each farming system lacks sustain-
ally (e.g. by analysing the evolution of a system ability or in which aspects each capital is weak. An
overtime). analysis of the weak points can lead to suggestions
of the kinds of interventions necessary to improve
Using MESMIS, Lopez-Ridaura et al. (2002) the performance of the system. By comparing
definedindicatorssuchasindependencefromexternal AMOEBAS from several farming systems, lessons
inputs, grain yield, system adoptability, food self- from one location may be transferred to another.
sufficiency, diversity of species, etc. As shown in Also reconstructing the AMOEBAS in each farm,
1 Figure 3, an AMOEBA-type diagram is used to every year after agroecological interventions, can
01 show, in qualitative terms, how far the objective has indicate whether progress is being made towards or
2
r beenreachedforeachindicatorbygivingthepercen- awayfromsustainability.
e
b tageoftheactualvaluewithrespecttotheidealvalue
m
e (reference value). This enables a simple yet compre-
v
o
N hensivecomparisonoftheadvantagesandlimitations Defining thresholds of performance
17 of the two systems being evaluated and compared, for a Green Agriculture
2 suggestingweakpointsthatmayneedimprovement.
1
8: Indicators can also be grouped according to their Most agricultural scientists and developers agree on
0
at relevance to the state of the social, economic and the need to design an agriculture that respects the
]
y
e
el
k
r
e
B
a,
ni
r
o
f
ali
C
f
o
y
sit
r
e
v
ni
U
[
y
b
d
e
d
a
o
nl
w
o
D
Figure 3|An AMOEBA diagram with indicators comparing two agrosilvopastoral systems (agroecological versus
conventional)inMexico.Indicatorsareinoriginalunitsandaspercentagesoflocallyderivedoptimums
Source:Lopez-Ridauraetal.(2002).
INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAGRICULTURALSUSTAINABILITY