A new analytical framework of farming system and agriculture model diversities. A review

Abstract

In most current farming system classifications (e.g. "conventional" versus "organic"), each type of farming system encompasses a wide variety of farming practices and performances. Classifying farming systems using concepts such as "ecological", "sustainable intensification" or "agro-ecology" is not satisfactory because the concepts "overlap in…def-initions, principles and practices, thus creating…confusion in their meanings, interpretations and implications". Existing classifications most often focus either on biotechnical functioning or on socio-economic contexts of farming systems. We reviewed the literature to develop an original analytical framework of the diversity of farming systems and agriculture models that deal with these limits. To describe this framework, we first present the main differences between three biotechnical types of farming systems differing in the role of ecosystem services and external inputs: chemical input-, biological inputand biodiversity-based farming systems. Second, we describe four key socio-economic contexts which determine development and functioning of these farming systems: globalised commodity-based food systems, circular economies, alternative food systems and integrated landscape approaches. Third, we present our original analytical framework of agriculture models, defined as biotechnical types of farming systems associated with one or a combination of socio-economic contexts differing in the role of relationships based on global market prices and "territorial embeddedness". We demonstrate the potential of this framework by describing six key agriculture models and reviewing key scientific issues in agronomy associated with each one. We then analyse the added value of our analytical framework and its generic character. Lastly, we discuss transversal research issues of the agriculture models, concerning the technologies required, their function in the bioeconomy, their multi-criteria and multilevel assessments, their co-existence and the transitions between them.

A new framework to analyse workforce contribution to Australian cotton farm adaptability

“…This should focus on better understanding of the role of farm workforce organisation and strategies under less extreme external variability; further development of analytical frameworks and methods for farming systems analysis inclusive of the farm workforce (Therond et al 2017); and examination of the institutional context for adaptability, given the importance of water policy and industrial relations policy in this case (e.g. the availability of overseas workers and the laws governing casual employment).…”

“…The cotton production sector in Australia can be broadly classified as a conventional farming system within a commodity socioeconomic framework (Therond et al 2017). The sector is considered to have high levels of technical efficiency, having improved water use efficiency by 40% in two decades (Roth et al 2014) and achieved some of the world's highest average yields, averaging over 7.5 bales to the hectare (Cotton Australia 2016).…”

Measuring Progress towards a Circular Economy: A Monitoring Framework for Economy‐wide Material Loop Closing in the EU28

“…; Dawson and Hilton ), the regional scale of ecological loop closing (Therond et al. ), and net carbon losses related to cultivation (Erb et al. ; Fargione et al.…”

“…A proper assessment of ecological loop closing is, however, not possible due to a lack of data and appropriate indicators. Criteria to be considered refer to soil degradation, overexploitation of water resources, efficient management of plant nutrients and livestock manure (Zanten et al 2018;Dawson and Hilton 2011), the regional scale of ecological loop closing (Therond et al 2017), and net carbon losses related to cultivation (Erb et al 2017;Fargione et al 2008). This issue is of particular importance because climate change mitigation and bioeconomy strategies foster the use of biomass.…”

Editorial: Optimizing the Delivery of Multiple Ecosystem Goods and Services in Agricultural Systems

“…Although the knowledge on management practices and their impacts on the biotic and abiotic components of agricultural landscapes are widely studied, application-oriented and targeted theoretical and methodological frameworks, keep emerging (e.g., Therond et al, 2017). Such frameworks are developed and assessed across a range of spatio-temporal scales to ensure their validity.…”