Sustainable Agriculture Systems, eds J. L. Hatfield & D. L. Karlen. 316 pp. Boca Raton: CRC Press (1994). £70. 00 (hardback). ISBN 1 56670 049 3.

1994 ◽  
Vol 123 (3) ◽  
pp. 422-422
Author(s):  
Howard Lee
1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 403-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald L. Wyse

Weed science has a long history of solving weed management problems for farmers. Over the last four decades most of the solutions to weed problems have been based on herbicide technology. Thus, most crop production systems in the United States rely heavily on herbicides as the primary method of weed management. During the last decade environmentalists, farmers, agricultural scientists, policy makers, and the general public have begun to question the long-term sustainability of conventional farming systems. The sustainability of these systems is being questioned because of environmental, social, and economic concerns caused by global competition, cost of production, soil erosion, water pollution, and concern over the quality of rural life. Weeds are the major deterrent to the development of more sustainable agriculture systems. Since weeds dictate most of the crop production practices (e.g., tillage, herbicides, cultivation, row spacing) weed scientists must become the leaders of collaborative integrated approaches to agriculture systems research. New crop production systems must be developed that are less destructive to the environment, are profitable, conserve energy, and support rural community development. The goal is to facilitate the development of ecologically based alternative methods of weed management that will support crop production systems that require less tillage and herbicide inputs. To accomplish this goal, research efforts must be radically expanded in weed/crop ecology and in the development of ecologically based technologies for weed management.


EDIS ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael G. Andreu ◽  
Bijay Tamang ◽  
Melissa H. Friedman ◽  
Donald L. Rockwood

FOR-192, a 5-page illustrated fact sheet by Michael G. Andreu, Bijay Tamang, Melissa H. Friedman, and Don Rockwood, focuses on the advantages and disadvantages of living windbreaks for improving crop production and enhancing conservation activities in sustainable agriculture systems. Includes references. Published by the UF School of Forest Resources and Conservation, July 2008. FOR192/FR253: The Benefits of Windbreaks for Florida Growers (ufl.edu)


Author(s):  
Raquel Salgado Sánchez

El mercado provee incentivos a los agricultores y asociado al consumo urbano influye en el tipo de tecnología que se aplica en la agricultura. Si los consumidores tomaran decisiones de abasto en interacción con los agricultores y sus decisiones de producción, sería posible favorecer la reproducción de sistemas de agricultura sustentable. En este artículo se presentan y analizan comentarios de habitantes de la ciudad de México, conseguidos en sesiones de grupos de enfoque, de sus opiniones sobre agricultura, agricultores y prácticas de abasto. Se identificaron tendencias de desconocimiento y desconexión entre consumidores urbanos de clase media y agricultura. Si los consumidores comprendieran que su interacción con los agricultores puede contribuir a la sustentabilidad de la agricultura, en esta se podría integrar la diversidad biológica y social.AbstractThe market provides incentives to farmers, in association with urban consumption it influences technology types to be applied in agricultural systems. If consumers made supply decisions interacting with farmers and their production decisions it would be possible to bring on sustainable agriculture systems. This article presents and analyzes comments from focus groups sessions involving inhabitants of Mexico City about their opinions regarding agriculture, farmers, and supply practices. Ignorance and disconnection tendencies were identified between middle class urban consumers and agriculture. If consumers understood that their interaction with farmers can contribute to the sustainability of agriculture, biological and social diversity could be integrated in it.


1986 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 169-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Lowrance ◽  
Paul F. Hendrix ◽  
Eugene P. Odum

Abstract“Sustainable agriculture” means many things to different people in agriculture. At least three different definitions of sustainability are available: sustainability as food sufficiency; sustainability as stewardship; and sustainability as community. Since increased human populations will cause demands for food to continue to grow in the foreseeable future, agricultural sustainability needs to be assessed in ways that will incorporate competing definitions. We suggest that analyzing agriculture as a hierarchical system is the appropriate way to incorporate different concepts of sustainability. Using this concept, we propose a hierarchical definition of sustainability. Agronomic sustainability refers to the ability of a tract of land to maintain productivity over a long period of time. Microeconomic sustainability is dependent on the ability of the farm, as the basic economic unit, to stay in business. Ecological sustainability depends on the maintenance of life-support systems provided by non-agricultural and non-industrial segments of a region. Macroeconomic sustainability is controlled by factors such as fiscal policies and interest rates which determine the viability of national agriculture systems. In our view, there are critical constraints to sustainability at different scales of the agricultural hierarchy. We propose that agronomic constraints are most important at the field scale; microeconomic constraints are dominant at the farm scale; ecological constraints override at the watershed or landscape scale; and macroeconomic constraints are foremost at the regional and national scale. In this paper, we describe the actions of these critical constraints, discuss interactions among various hierarchical levels, and propose ways that agricultural researchers and policy makers can integrate the various views of sustainability.


2008 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joysee M. Rodriguez ◽  
Joseph John Molnar ◽  
Robin A. Fazio ◽  
Emily Sydnor ◽  
Mecca J. Lowe

AbstractConventional agriculture systems of production often lead to environmental degradation, economic problems and even social conflict. The efficacy of agriculture systems conducive to the economic, environmental and social sustainability of farming operations has been demonstrated, yet the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices is not widespread. This qualitative study is based on a web-based survey instrument designed to elicit the barriers to adoption of sustainable agriculture practices (SAP) perceived by a positional and network sample of 269 change agents working with farmers in the US South. The analysis examines the general proposition that reluctance to change to SAP is an overused rationale of change agents that tends to mask real barriers that we endeavor to elicit in the survey. It was found that despite having support from technical assistance providers, farmers are rarely adopting SAP. Change agents often are not well prepared to attend to farmers' needs regarding SAP, particularly the needs of specific farming situations. Thus, farmers often struggle to obtain accurate information about the benefits of SAP. Government support programs often fail to encourage adoption due to lack of funding, inappropriate design and ineffective targeting of incentives. Reluctance to change is frequently mentioned by change agents, but more as a way of blaming farmers for nonadoption than explaining the often tangible reasons for their behaviors. Social barriers, land tenure, infrastructure and incompatibility are other significant impediments to adoption. Strategies such as improved management of the existing information, careful design of economic support programs and extension efforts addressed to change agents themselves could help overcome some of the barriers identified by change agents.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document