The Alternative-Conventional Agriculture Debate: Where Do Agricultural Faculty Stand?1

Abstract In recent years, publicly funded agricultural science at land grant universities (LGUs) has come under increasing criticism by those who argue that LGUs have contributed to an industrial mode of agriculture that is neither ecologically nor socioeconomically sustainable. The views of critics and defenders of modern industrial agriculture reflect two competing perspectives on agriculture—an alternative and a conventional paradigm. Utilizing a 24-item alternative-conventional agriculture paradigm (ACAP) scale, this study analyzes the paradigmatic positions of faculty in the College of Agriculture and Home Economics at Washington State University. Results reveal that the faculty are slightly more conventional than are farmers statewide, slightly less conventional than proponents of conventional agriculture, and far more conventional than known alternative agriculturalists. When looking at particular elements of the agricultural debate, however, the faculty tend to be more conventional than farmers on the socioeconomic elements of the competing paradigms but considerably less conventional on elements dealing with ecological and conservation issues. Women, younger faculty, non-land grant educated faculty, and faculty not raised on farms are somewhat more likely to endorse the alternative agriculture paradigm than are their counterparts. These differences are minor, however, compared to the differences across academic disciplines. Faculty of departments oriented to the social sciences (with the exception of agricultural economics) tend to most strongly endorse the alternative paradigm, while faculty from the more production-oriented departments and agricultural economics are the most conventional. Possible implications of the findings are discussed for the future of publicly-funded agricultural science.     

Are Conventional Farmers Conventional? Analysis of the Environmental Orientations of Conventional New Zealand Farmers*

Abstract Within the political economy of agriculture and agrofood literatures there are examples of approaches that reject simple dichotomies between alternatives and the mainstream. In line with such approaches, we challenge the assumption that alternative agriculture, and its attendant improved environmental practices, alternative management styles, less intensive approaches, and better approaches to animal and ecosystem welfare, is the only source of agricultural sustainability. This article uses national farm‐survey results for New Zealand's sheep and beef, dairy, and horticulture sectors to examine conventional farmers, measure their assessments of farming practices, and assess their environmental orientation. Analysis identifies a proenvironmental cluster of farmers in each sector characterized by a higher environmental‐orientation score and distinct ratings of other farm practices queried in the survey. We interpret the results in terms of the exposure of different agricultural sectors to the effects of market‐based, audited, best‐practice schemes. The presence of shades of “greenness” among conventional farmers has important implications for environmental management and for our understanding of the various and complex pathways toward the greening of agrofood systems.     

Alternative and Conventional Agricultural Paradigms: Evidence From Farming in Southwest Saskatchewan*

Abstract Agricultural analysts have suggested that the emergence of an alternative agriculture system represents more than changes in practices; it is also thought to represent a shift in environmental beliefs, values, attitudes, and norms. This means that conventional and alternative systems of agriculture represent distinct paradigms which are informed by two contradictory worldviews. Insofar as this claim is correct, it is possible to delineate, target, and promote one paradigm, depending on the system of agriculture that policy makers wish to encourage. In this paper we seek to clarify the practical application of the two agricultural paradigms by examining the practices, beliefs, values, norms, and attitudes of farmers in southwest Saskatchewan, part of the semi‐arid section of the North American Great Plains. Findings support the view that different farming systems correspond to different worldviews. Strong confidence in the market, however, is not limited to conventional farmers, as suggested by the literature.     

Agricultural change and restructuring: recent evidence from a survey of agricultural households in England

Despite widespread speculation about the likely future extent of agricultural restructuring in the UK, researchers and policymakers are surprisingly ignorant of the nature and extent of farm household adjustment in the period since the mid 1990s. Meanwhile, claims that agriculture is in crisis and on the threshold of radical structural change continue to receive widespread media attention. Critics point out that because European policy debates are constructed in ways which emphasise the vulnerability of farmers and their businesses, there is a lack of attention to the true status and economic sustainability of agricultural households themselves. This paper reports results from a recent survey of agricultural business restructuring within six English study areas selected to span a range of agricultural settings and designed to identify the different trajectories of change to be found there. It concludes that while there is some evidence of disengagement from mainstream agriculture and an increasingly diverse set of relationships between the occupation and management of land, commitment to remaining in agriculture remains strong amongst farming families. A substantial proportion of agricultural and agri-environmental assets seem likely to remain in the same hands for the foreseeable future.     

Measuring Adherence to Alternative vs. Conventional Agricultural Paradigms: A Proposed Scale*

Abstract Current debates and conflicts in agriculture appear to reflect the competing perspectives of two increasingly distinct camps of agricultural stakeholders: proponents of “alternative agriculture” and proponents of “conventional agriculture.” Several analysts have argued that members of these two camps hold fundamentally divergent paradigms of agriculture, and thus, literally see the world quite differently. The purpose of this paper is to describe an instrument—the Alternative-Conventional Agriculture Paradigm Scale (or ACAP Scale)—developed to measure the basic beliefs and values assumed to constitute the two competing perspectives in agriculture. Items designed to tap all of the major dimensions identified in the alternative-conventional agriculture debate were included in surveys of known groups of alternative and conventional agriculturalists, as well as in a statewide survey of farmers. The items discriminate significantly between the three samples (with the statewide farmer sample taking the intermediate position), suggesting their validity as measures of the elements of the competing agricultural paradigms. The items also exhibit a high degree of internal consistency, indicating the appropriateness of combining them into a single instrument to measure adherence to alternative versus conventional agriculture. As expected, the known groups provide more consistent responses than do the statewide sample of farmers, presumably reflecting the greater ideological coherence of social movement and interest group members. However, the alternative agriculturalists are far more consistent than are the conventional agriculturalists, and potential explanations for this finding are drawn from recent work on social movements.     

Feminist Knowledge Claims,Local Knowledge,and Gender Divisions of Agricultural Labor: Constructing a Successor Science1

Abstract Issues raised by the feminist epistemic critique of social science are used to examine what is meant by local knowledge and its contribution to analyses of agricultural sustainability. Employing the concepts of partial perspective, lived experience, and the complexity of social context, this paper focuses attention on the juxtaposition of local and scientific knowledge and challenges those interpretations of local knowledge production that ignore the various people, relations, and interests constituting the rural economy. An examination of local as a contested, complex, and heterogeneous domain refines the work of Kloppenburg (1991) and his commitment to the significance of local knowledge in constructing opportunities for sustainable agriculture. Attention to the on-farm gender division of labor helps to identify gender differences as critical in constituting the family farm and to elaborate how the different experiences of women and men may offer alternative visions of what constitutes sustainable agricultural production.     

Conventional versus Alternative Agriculture: The Paradigmatic Roots of the Debate*

Abstract Analysts have described conflict between the economically dominant industrial sector of society and the environmental movement as representing competition between two opposing worldviews or social paradigms. There appears to be a similar schism developing in agriculture. The conventional paradigm of large-scale, highly industrialized agriculture is being challenged by an increasingly vocal alternative agriculture movement which advocates major shifts toward a more “ecologically sustainable agriculture.” Some have suggested that alternative agriculture represents a fundamentally new paradigm for agriculture. This paper seeks to clarify and synthesize the core beliefs and values underlying these two approaches to agriculture into a “conventional agriculture paradigm” and an “alternative agriculture paradigm.” The writings of six major proponents of alternative agriculture are compared with those of six leading proponents of conventional agriculture to document the major components of the two agricultural paradigms. The two sets of writings reveal dramatically divergent perspectives on a wide range of agricultural issues. The competing paradigms can be synthesized into six major dimensions: 1) centralization vs. decentralization, 2) dependence vs. independence, 3) competition vs. community, 4) domination of nature vs. harmony with nature, 5) specialization vs. diversity, and 6) exploitation vs. restraint. The emerging controversy over “low-input, sustainable agriculture” (LISA) illustrates the paradigmatic gulf between alternative and conventional agriculture, as well as the pitfalls facing alternative agriculturalists as they attempt to replace conventional agriculture as the dominant paradigm.     

Embeddedness and local food systems: notes on two types of direct agricultural market

Direct agricultural markets, predicated on face-to-face ties between producers and consumers, are often seen as central components of local food systems. Activists and academic analysts often assume that trust and social connection characterize direct agricultural markets, distinguishing local food systems from the “global food system”. This article examines that premise about direct agricultural markets, using the concept of social embeddedness from economic sociology to analyze the interplay of the economic and the social. Specifically, it draws on Block's (1990) elaboration of the concepts of marketness and instrumentalism to qualify the concept of social embeddedness. Taken together, and augmented by consideration of how they relate to power and privilege, these concepts provide an analytical framework that more accurately describes the social relations of two types of direct agricultural markets — the farmers’ market and community supported agriculture. In providing an alternative market, farmers’ markets create a context for closer social ties between farmers and consumers, but remain fundamentally rooted in commodity relations. In attempting to construct an alternative to the market, as reflected in an explicit emphasis on community and in the distinctive “share” relationship, community supported agriculture moves closer towards the decommodification of food. Nonetheless, in both types of direct markets, tensions between embeddedness, on the one hand, and marketness and instrumentalism, on the other, suggest how power and privilege may sometimes rest more with educated, middle-class consumers than with farmers or less-advantaged consumers. Recognizing how marketness and instrumentalism complicate social embeddedness is critical for understanding the viability, development and prospects of local food systems.     

Entrepreneurs and producers: Identities of Finnish farmers in 2001 and 2006

The farmers' role within the EU has recently been under reconstruction: in addition to primary agricultural production farmers should fulfil multiple functions such as maintaining the rural landscape, conserving nature and providing services. One essential feature of this new role is the demand for entrepreneurship. Farmers should be capable of competing in the worldwide, global agricultural market. They are also encouraged to diversify into business activities beyond agriculture. How do farmers see themselves in this situation? Is their self-perception compatible with this new reconstruction of the farming economy and the farmers' role? Research, thus far, seems to indicate that traditional or production oriented identities are still dominant among farmers. But there is also some evidence that new identities, such as the entrepreneurial identity, are emerging. In our study we are especially interested in how Finnish farmers have met the demand for adapting to the role of an entrepreneur. We approach the issue of the farmers' changing role from a social psychological perspective by utilizing the concept of identity. Our empirical evidence comes from two nation-wide postal questionnaire data sets, both containing samples from three subgroups: conventional farmers focusing solely on primary agricultural production, diversified farmers who also had other business besides agricultural production, and rural non-agricultural small-scale businesses. The results show that Finnish farmers do not experience “entrepreneur” as something distant from themselves and as not fitting in with their world of ideas, as the work of some researchers would depict. Instead, the majority of Finnish farmers, especially diversified farmers, conceive of themselves both as entrepreneurs and as producers.     

Work and technological innovation in organic agriculture

Organic agriculture is a sustainable cultivation ecologically, economically and socially. Several researches in organic agriculture have been made from technical perspectives, economic traits or related to ecological aspects. There are practically no investigations into the nature of the technology used in organic agriculture, especially from an ergonomic perspective. From the activity analysis, this study aimed to map the technology used in the production of organic vegetables. Properties producing organic vegetables were selected representing the State of S?o Paulo. It was applied an instrument (questionnaire and semi-structured interview) with their managers and it was made visual records to identify adaptations, innovations and technological demands that simultaneously minimize the workload and the difficulties in performing the tasks and increase work productivity. For some of the technological innovations a digital scanner was used to generate a virtual solid model to facilitate its redesign and virtual prototyping. The main results show that organic farmers have little technology in product form. The main innovations that enable competitive advantage or allow higher labor productivity occur in the form of processes, organization and marketing.     

Conversion to Organic Dairy Production in the Netherlands: Opportunities and Constraints*

Abstract Organic agriculture is perceived as being more sustainable than conventional agriculture. However, while there is a growing interest in, and market for, organic products, large‐scale conversion to organic agriculture is not taking place. Even though conversion from conventional to organic dairy production is not especially difficult in theory, conversion is slow in this specific sector. The conversion process to organic agriculture is often analyzed by investigating farmer motivations and attitudes. However, since modern agricultural production is organized in production chains, which are in turn subject to stakeholder influence, a wider focus that includes these interrelationships might provide new insights regarding the lagging conversion. Based on document analysis, policy analysis, and interviews, this article investigates opportunities for, and barriers to, conversion to organic dairy production in the Netherlands within the setting of the chain network. Opportunities and barriers are found at three levels within the chain network: the actor level, the chain level, and the network level. We conclude that, despite some involvement in organic production and a positive disposition toward it, the chain network is not ready for a large‐scale conversion.     

Innovating Conservation Agriculture: The Case of No‐Till Cropping

Abstract The extensive sociological studies of conservation agriculture have provided considerable understanding of farmers' use of conservation practices, but attempts to develop predictive models have failed. Reviews of research findings question the utility of the conceptual and methodological perspectives of prior research. The argument advanced here is that actor‐network theory is useful in analyzing conservation agriculture as a radically different agriculture: a new paradigm with new beliefs about soils, plants, the environment, and farmers themselves as well as new crop production systems. The new indigenous cultures of conservation tillage and cropping are innovative products of social networks that join farmland, farmers, farm advisors, and farm supply representatives in new ways. The spread of conservation agriculture has occurred as the result both of new agricultural science of conservation tillage and cropping and the spread of these new networks and their innovative cropping systems.     

Designing Dreams or Constructing Contradictions? European Union Multifunctional Policies and the Polish Organic Farm Sector*

Analysts have heralded the principle of “multifunctionality” undergirding the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy “Second Pillar” support mechanisms as a “new . . . and strong paradigm” for agriculture ( van der Ploeg and Roep 2003 ), with the potential to re‐embed social, environmental, and ethical concerns into the structure of the agricultural system. Multifunctionality‐inspired agrienvironmental policies arguably represent an alternative to the productivist‐focused structural forces driving global industrialized agriculture. Yet few empirical studies interrogate the links between the assumed benefits of these policies and farmer experiences. This article examines the introduction of European Union multifunctional agrienvironmental policies in Poland, specifically incentives and supports for certified organic farming, and demonstrates that while favorable incentive subsidies have promoted increased entry into the organic farming sector, inattention to contextual factors has generated barriers to entry and access, creating unanticipated vulnerabilities for Poland's organic farmers and subsequent contradictions in policy implementation. Furthermore, this article demonstrates that, although specific organic certification standards have changed little since Poland's accession to the European Union, the processes associated with new EU multifunctional policies have shifted toward greater institutionalization and bureaucratization, potentially thwarting the efficacy of multifunctional incentives for organic agriculture in the Polish context.     

Conventionalization, civic engagement, and the sustainability of organic agriculture

It is often assumed that organic farming is synonymous with sustainable agriculture. The broad goals of sustainable agriculture include economic profitability, environmental stewardship, and community vitality. However, the “question of sustainability” (Ikerd, 2008) can be asked of any type of farming, including organic production. One way to assess sustainability is to consider farmers’ perceptions of the sustainability of their operations. I draw on data from a survey of certified organic producers in Washington State to broaden our understanding of the sustainability of organic agriculture. Specifically, I consider certified organic producers’ perceptions of the degree to which their operations contribute to broad sustainable agriculture goals. Moreover, I use multiple regression to investigate how these perceived contributions are influenced by farm conventionalization variables (e.g., organic acreage, non-organic sales, and specialization) and civic engagement variables (e.g., direct marketing, community group membership, and participation in sustainable/organic agriculture organizations) while controlling for farmer demographics and farm location. Farm conventionalization appears to have a significant negative effect on perceived contributions to environmental and social sustainability, but a significant positive effect on perceived contribution to economic sustainability. Civic engagement appears to have a significant positive effect on perceived contributions to environmental and social sustainability, but no effect on perceived contribution to economic sustainability.     

Smallholder participation and certification of organic farm products in Mexico

Organic and other environmental and social marketing devices seek to connect producers and consumers more directly and reward environmentally and socially superior production systems. Some researchers have observed that these schemes may introduce mechanisms of exclusion, creating an elite group of certified smallholders while putting non-certified farmers at a distinct disadvantage and introducing division among people whose true interest may lie more in relations of solidarity and cooperation. The trade and regulatory environment that smallholder coops must navigate is increasingly complex and adaptation to its requirements has important implications for farmer organizations. Standards applied to certify smallholder production systems tend to be developed with regard to first-world consumer interests and imposed in a top–down fashion by certification agencies and intermediaries, with little or no farmer participation. Especially in the tropics, agricultural standards that reflect temperate country conditions may place unnecessary burdens on growers who attempt to meet agronomic norms that are irrelevant to local agroecologies. After providing a summary of organic farming and certification in Mexico over the past two decades, we discuss three emerging trends: the advent of contract agriculture in organic production, the appearance of a new, environmentally-based coffee certification system intended to favor bird conservation, and a recent government program to support transition to organic production. All three trends involve certain contradictions, both with the foundational social and ecological goals of organic agriculture and with the interests of small farmers.     

Diversification and Work Satisfaction: Testing a Claim by Marx and Engels for Farmers

In conventional economics, a great deal of energy has been devoted to empirical validation of the benefits of specialization in terms of efficiency, in fields including the agricultural sector. Marx and Engels's claim that the diversification of working lives would increase work satisfaction has gained attention among social scientists but has never been verified for the agricultural sector, despite a growing body of literature on the determinants of work satisfaction. Based on a survey of Swiss and northeast German farmers, this study shows that farm diversification significantly increases work satisfaction. This applies both to the lines of agricultural production pursued on a farm and to the farm's nonagricultural activities.     

Typology of causes of poverty: The perception of Iranian farmers

Causal attributions are important mediators of future behaviour because once a cause is assigned; a commensurate action can be taken. The aims of this research were to find how Iranian farmers attribute the causes of poverty, to provide a typology of attribution of causes of poverty as perceived by Iranian farmers and to compare socio-economic characteristics and contextual conditions of farmers based on their causal attribution of poverty type. Findings revealed that 50% of respondents had structuralistic, almost 30% had individualistic, and about 20% hold fatalistic attitudes towards the causes of poverty. Farmers with individualistic attitudes towards the causes of poverty had higher quality of life, well-being, level of agricultural technology, agricultural production, used insurance more often, they had more land, income, access to agricultural extension services and practiced sustainable agriculture more often. Farmers with fatalistic attitudes towards the causes of poverty had the worst condition with regard to the above variables. However, those who had structuralistic attitudes, stood somewhere between the two previous groups. Based on findings, a number of poverty alleviation recommendations are made.     

Multifunctional agriculture in policy and practice? A comparative analysis of Norway and Australia

Ideals of productivist agriculture in the Western world have faded as the unintended consequences of intensive agriculture and pastoralism have contributed to rural decline and environmental problems. In Norway and Australia, there has been an increasing acceptance of the equal importance of social and environmental sustainability as well as economic sustainability. Alongside this shift is a belief that primary production needs to move away from an intensive, productivist-based agriculture to one that may be defined as post-productivist. In this paper, we argue that the dualism of productivism and post-productivism as concepts on agricultural policy regimes are too simplistic and discuss whether multifunctional agriculture is a better concept for a comparison of rural primary production at two extreme points of the scale, the market-oriented, liberalistic Australian agriculture and the market-protected small-scale Norwegian agriculture. We argue that multifunctionality in Australia rates relatively weakly as an ideology or policy and even less as a discourse or practice and hence is situated toward a ‘weak’ end of a continuum of a level of multifunctional agriculture. In Norwegian agriculture, multifunctional agriculture has thrived within a protectionist setting with the support of the public, the state and agricultural actors. In this sense it is very clearly a policy, practice and discourse that aims to preserve and conserve rural spaces, the cultural landscape, the farming way of life and food safety. Norway is as such situated toward a ‘strong’ end of a continuum of a level of multifunctional agriculture.     

The Production Function,Crop Diversity,and the Debate Between Conventional and Sustainable Agriculture1

Abstract Organizational assumptions embedded in the production function of neoclassical economics have served to structure production agriculture in the United States for the past 100 years. The narrow focus of the production function on the inputs of land, labor, capital, and management and the use of on-farm profitability as the primary definition of sustainability have come under attack from sustainable agriculturalists, who argue that the social and environmental consequences of production are as important as the economic outcomes. Using diversity of crops harvested as an indicator of sustainability, the production function is operationalized to inform the debate between the conventional, neoclassical model of production and the alternative, sustainable model. Census of agriculture data from 1978, 1982, and 1987 are used in both cross-sectional and temporal models. Results show that increases in expenditures for equipment and machinery, prevalence of corporate farms, higher rates of tenancy, and the prevalence of large farms are associated with lower levels of diversity at the county level. Conversely, higher levels of diversity are found in counties with greater farm labor expenses, where there are more medium-size farms, and where farmers are more likely to farm full-time.     

Manipulated Masculinities: Agribusiness,Deskilling, and the Rise of the Businessman‐Farmer in the United States

In this study we examine how the agribusiness industry works to manipulate conventional farming masculinities in the United States to facilitate agricultural deskilling, a process that has serious implications for the future of sustainable agriculture uptake among American farmers. Through analyzing one year's worth of advertisements in three conventional farming magazines and through conducting participant observation and interviews at the second largest indoor farming show in the United States, we examine the ways in which agribusiness companies, such as chemical, seed, and farm machinery manufacturers, represent farmers and farming masculinities in their advertisements and marketing materials. We observe a shift occurring among certain agribusiness sectors away from representations of a rugged, strong, solitary farmer, who dominates nature through his manual labor, to depictions of a “businessman” farmer, who farms in collaboration with certain qualified partners (i.e., company representatives). We ultimately argue that these new representations of farming masculinity aim to more deeply entrench conventional farmers' dependence on chemical inputs and agribusiness products by promoting a process of deskilling, effectively alienating the farmer from the land.