Skip to main content

Multi-functional landscapes from the grassroots? The role of rural producer movements

Agriculture and Human Values volume 33, pages 305–322 (2016)Cite this article

Abstract

Around the world, agricultural landscapes are increasingly seen as “multi-functional” spaces, expected to deliver food supplies while improving rural livelihoods and protecting and restoring healthy ecosystems. To support this array of functions and benefits, governments and civil society in many regions are now promoting integrated farm- and landscape-scale management strategies, in lieu of fragmented management strategies. While rural producers are fundamental to achieving multi-functional landscapes, they are frequently viewed as targets of, or barriers to, landscape-oriented initiatives, rather than as leading agents of change. In reality, however, rural producers in many areas have embraced elements of multi-functional land management. In this paper, we explore the role and recent evolution of producer movements in influencing multi-functional farm and landscape management. We explore these roles through six case studies, including a land reform movement in Brazil, indigenous territorial development in Bolivia, conservation agriculture associations in Canada, environmental cooperatives in the Netherlands, indigenous and biocultural heritage associations in Peru, and Landcare groups in the Philippines. These experiences suggest that producer movements are playing pivotal roles in supporting landscape multi-functionality, not only through agroecological farming practices but also through off-farm efforts to conserve ecosystems and support multi-stakeholder landscape planning. On the other hand, interests of producer movements are not always fully aligned with multi-functional landscape management approaches. The contribution of producer movements to multi-functional landscapes depends on these movements including farm and landscape stewardship in their values and goals, and having the political support and capacity to engage meaningfully in multi-stakeholder processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Abbreviations

ANAPQUI:

Asociación Nacional de Productores de Quinua, The National Quinoa Producers’ Association

ATO:

Alternative trade organization

BMP:

Best management practice

CCA:

Community Conserved Area

CIP:

International Potato Center

COCAMP:

Cooperativa dos Assentados da Reforma Agraria do Pontal, Agrarian Reform Settlers’ Cooperative in the Pontal

CSFSP:

Canada–Saskatchewan Farmer Stewardship Program

ICRAF:

World Agroforestry Center

IFOAM:

International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements

IPE:

Institute of Ecological Research

MST:

Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra, Rural Landless Workers’ Movement

NFW:

Northern Friesian Woodlands Agricultural Cooperative

NGO:

Non-government organization

NVS:

Natural vegetative strips

PFRA:

Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act

PROQUINAT:

Natural Quinoa Production Standard

SSCA:

Saskatchewan Soil Conservation Association

References

  • Alter Eco. 2013. Alter Eco-ANAPQUI partnership model. Alter Eco. http://www.alterecofoods.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Alter-Eco-ANAPQUI-Partnership-Model.pdf. Accessed 20 Jan 2014.

  • Altieri, M.A. 1995. Agroecology: The science of sustainable agriculture. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altieri, M.A., and V.M. Toledo. 2011. The agroecological revolution in Latin America: Rescuing nature, ensuring food sovereignty and empowering peasants. Journal of Peasant Studies 38: 587–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argumedo, A. 2008. The Potato Park, Peru: Conserving agrobiodiversity in an Andean indigenous biocultural heritage area. Protected landscapes and agrobiodiversity values. Volume 1 in the series, Protected landscapes and seascapes. Geneva: IUCN & GTZ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argumedo, A., and M.P. Pimbert. 2005. Traditional resource rights and indigenous people in the Andes. London: IIED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argumedo, A., and B.Y.L. Wong. 2010. The ayllu system of the Potato Park (Peru). Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity in Socio-Ecological Production Landscapes 52: 84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aroni, G. 2008. Recupercaión de suelos para una producción sostenible de quinua en el Altiplano sur. Revista Habitat 75: 50–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Association of Communities of Potato Park. 2012. Somos cinco, pero somos uno: principios andinos. http://www.parquedelapapa.org/esp/02somos_02.html. Accessed 20 Dec 2013.

  • Ashoka. 2002. Ashoka: Innovators for the public. http://www.ashoka.org/fellow/laury-cullen. Accessed 8 Nov 2012.

  • Ayaviri, G.S., N. Choque, and G. Panamá. 2003. La historia de nuestra organización: Asociación Nacional de Productores de Quinua: ANAPQUI. La Paz: ANAPQUI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barr, J., A. Gough, and A. Russillo. 2009. Rapid assessment case study: The environmental information infrastructure of pulse production in Canada. Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benford, R.D., and D.A. Snow. 2000. Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology 26: 611–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borras Jr, S.M. 2008. La Vía Campesina and its global campaign for agrarian reform. Journal of Agrarian Change 8: 258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, J., and H. Vejre. 2004. Multifunctional landscapes-motives, concepts and perceptions. Multifunctional landscapes. In Multifunctional landscapes, vol. 1, ed. J. Brandt, and H. Vejre, 3–32., Theory, values and history Southampton: WIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brett, J.A. 2010. The political-economics of developing markets versus satisfying food needs. Food and Foodways 18: 28–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CABOLQUI. 2009. Dinamica actual del rubro quinero en Bolivia. CPTS desarrollo agroindustrial quinua en el altiplano: CABOLQUI. La Paz, Bolivia: CABOLQUI.

  • Cáceres, Z., A. Carimentrand, and J. Wilkinson. 2007. 11 Fair trade and quinoa from the southern Bolivian Altiplano. Fair trade: The challenges of transforming globalization. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catacutan, D. 2010. Scaling up landcare in the Philippines. Colne: Lambert Academic Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cossio, J. 2008. Agricultura de conservación con un enfoque de manejo sostenible en el Altiplano sur. Revista Habitat 7: 44–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramb, R. 2006. The role of social capital in the promotion of conservation farming: the case of ‘landcare’in the Southern Philippines. Land Degradation and Development 17: 23–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, L., K. Alger, and D.M. Rambaldi. 2005. Land reform and biodiversity conservation in Brazil in the 1990s: Conflict and the articulation of mutual interests. Conservation Biology 19: 747–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, A., and T. de Lacy. 1998. Landcare, stewardship and sustainable agriculture in Australia. Environmental Values 7: 59–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dano, M.N., E. Elago, D. Catacutan, and A. Mercado Jr. 2009. Landcare in the Philippines. In Landcare: Local action—Global progress, ed. D. Catacutan, C. Neely, M. Johnston, H. Proussard, and R. Youl, 64–78. Nairobi: World Agroforestry Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Jonge, B. 2008. Between sharing and protecting: public research on genetic resources in the year of the potato. Life Sciences, Society and Policy 4: 10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Rooij, S. 2006. Territorial cooperative networks: new social carriers for endogenous rural development. Moving worldviews, reshaping sciences, policies and practices for endogenous sustanaible development. COMPAS series on Worldviews and Sciencies 4: 237–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Schutter O. 2011. Agroecology and the right to food. In Report presented at the 16th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council [A/HRC/16/49]. New York: UN.

  • Develtere, P., I. Pollet, and F. Wanyama. 2008. Cooperating out of poverty: The renaissance of the African cooperative movement. Geneva: ILO.

    Google Scholar 

  • El Diario. 2012. Comercialización de la quinua real del altiplano sur de Bolivia. La Paz: El Diario.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espaldon, M.V., M.U. Tapia, J.D. Villanueva, and P. Jaranilla-Sanchez. 2006. Philippine landcare after nine years: A study on the impacts of agroforestry on communities, farming households and the local environment in Mindanao ICRAF Occasional Paper. Nairobi: World Agroforestry Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estrada-Carmona, N., A.K. Hart, F.A.J. DeClerck, C.A. Harvey, and J.C. Milder. 2014. Integrated landscape management for agriculture, rural livelihoods, and ecosystem conservation: An assessment of experience from Latin America and the Caribbean. Landscape and Urban Planning 12: 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foweraker, J. 1995. Theorizing social movements. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, T.A., T.E. Barchyn, and C.H. Hugenholtz. 2012. Successes of soil conservation in the Canadian prairies highlighted by a historical decline in blowing dust. Environmental Research Letters 7: 014008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fry, G.L. 2001. Multifunctional landscapes—Towards transdisciplinary research. Landscape and Urban Planning 57(3): 159–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujisaka, S., E. Jayso, and A. Dapusala. 1994. Trees, grasses, and weeds: Species choices in farmed-developed contour hedgerows. Agroforestry Systems 25: 13–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fulton, F., and B. Sonntag. 2010. History of early Western Canadian agriculture—Setting the stage for conservation. In Landscapes transformed: The history of conservation tillage and direct seeding, ed. C.W. Lindwall, and B. Sonntag. Saskatoon: Knowledge Impact in Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gliessman, S.R., E. Engles, and R. Krieger. 1998. Agroecology: Ecological processes in sustainable agriculture. AnnArbor: Ann Arbor Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of Saskatchewan. 2014. Growing forward 2: Farm stewardship program. http://www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/GF2-FarmStewardship. Accessed 20 Dec 2014.

  • Groot, J.C., W. Rossing, A. Jellema, D.J. Stobbelaar, H. Renting, and M.K. Van Ittersum. 2007. Exploring multi-scale trade-offs between nature conservation, agricultural profits and landscape quality—A methodology to support discussions on land-use perspectives. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 120: 58–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellin, J., and S. Higman. 2005. Crop diversity and livelihood security in the Andes. Development in Practice 15: 165–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt-Giménez, E. 2009. From food crisis to food sovereignty. Monthly Review 61: 142–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IAASTD. 2009. International assessment of agricultural knowledge, science and technology for development (IAASTD): Synthesis report. Washington, DC: IAASTD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ichikawa, K., and G. Toth. 2012. The satoyama landscape of Japan: The future of an indigenous agricultural system in an industrialized society. In Agroforestry—The future of global land use, ed. P.K.R. Nair, and D. Garrity, 341–358. Houten: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • IFOAM. 2012. The IFOAM norms for organic production and processing. Germany: IFOAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janzen, H.H. 2001. Soil science on the Canadian prairies—Peering into the future from a century ago. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 81: 489–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joffre, R., and J. Acho. 2008. Quinua, descanso y tholares en el sur del Altiplano Boliviano. Revista Habitat 75: 38–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karriem, A., E. Michael, H. Gillian, K. Stefan, and L. Alex. 2012. Space, ecology, and politics in the praxis of the Brazilian Landless Movement. In Gramsci: Space, nature, politics, ed. M. Ekers, G. Hart, S. Kipter, and A. Loftus, 142–160. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kay, C. 1998. Latin America’s agrarian reform: Lights and shadows. Land Reform, Land Settlement and Cooperatives 2: 9–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koohafkan, P., and M.A. Altieri. 2011. Globally important agricultural heritage systems: A legacy for the future. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kothari, A. 2008. The 4C factor: Community conservation and climate change. Biodiversity 9: 19–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kremen, C., and A. Miles. 2012. Ecosystem services in biologically diversified versus conventional farming systems: Benefits, externalities, and trade-offs. Ecology and Society 17: 40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campesina, La Vía. 2010. Sustainable peasant and family farm agriculture can feed the world. Harare: La Vía Campesina.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lafond, G., G. Clayton, D. Fowler, R. Jat, K. Sahrawat, and A. Kassam. 2014. Conservation agriculture on the Canadian prairies, 89–107. Conservation Agriculture: Global Prospects and Challenges.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lafond, G., B. McConkey, and M. Stumborg. 2009. Conservation tillage models for small-scale farming: Linking the Canadian experience to the small farms of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region in China. Soil and Tillage Research 104: 150–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson, A.M., D. Barry, and G.R. Dahal. 2010. Forests for people: Community rights and forest tenure reform. Oxford: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasco, R., G. Villamor, F. Pulhin, D. Catacutan, and M. Bertomeu. 2008. From principles to numbers: Approaches in implementing payments for environmental services (PES) in the Philippines. In Smallholder tree growing for rural development and environmental services, ed. D. Snelder, and R. Lasco, 379–391. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Liberman, M. 2008. El cultivo de la quinua orgánica en Oruro y Potosí. Revista Habitat 75: 18–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • LPFN. 2014. Integrated landscape management in Africa: A synthesis of evidence. Washington, DC: EcoAgriculture Partners on behalf of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature (LPFN) Initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinelli, L.A., R. Naylor, P.M. Vitousek, and P. Moutinho. 2010. Agriculture in Brazil: Impacts, costs, and opportunities for a sustainable future. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2: 431–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Torres, M.E., and P.M. Rosset. 2010. La Vía Campesina: The birth and evolution of a transnational social movement. The Journal of Peasant Studies 37: 149–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClinton, B., and J. Polegi. 2010. Saskatchewan Soil Conservation Association. In Landscapes transformed: The history of conservation tillage and direct seeding, ed. C.W. Lindwall, and B. Sonntag. Saskatoon: Knowledge Impact and Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMichael, P. 2006. Reframing development: Global peasant movements and the new agrarian question. Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d’études du développement 27: 471–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercado Jr, A.R., M. Patindol, and D.P. Garrity. 2001. The Landcare experience in the Philippines: Technical and institutional innovations for conservation farming. Development in Practice 11: 495–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milder, J.C., A.K. Hart, P. Dobie, J. Minai, and C. Zaleski. 2014. Integrated landscape initiatives for African agriculture, development, and conservation: A region-wide assessment. World Development 54: 68–80. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.07.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, P.H. 2004. Democratizing rural economy: Institutional friction, sustainable struggle and the cooperative movement. Rural Sociology 69: 76–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R., and R. Cramb. 1998. Economic incentives for farmers in the Philippine uplands to adopt hedgerow intercropping. Journal of Environmental Management 54: 83–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NFW. 2012. Plaats en rol van de themagroepen binnen het Nationaal Landschap Noardlike Fryske Wâlden. http://www.noardlikefryskewalden.nl. Accessed 6 Dec 2014.

  • Perfecto, I., J.H. Vandermeer, and A.L. Wright. 2009. Nature’s matrix: Linking agriculture, conservation and food sovereignty. Oxford: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimbert, M.P. 2008. Towards food sovereignty: Reclaiming autonomous food systems. London: IIED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimbert, M.P., and A. Argumedo. 2008. Protecting farmers’ rights with indigenous biocultural heritage territories: The experience of the potato park. London: IIED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J., A.D. Noble, D. Bossio, J. Dixon, R.E. Hine, F.W.T. Penning de Vries, and J.I.L. Morison. 2005. Resource-conserving agriculture increases yields in developing countries. Environmental Science and Technology 40: 1114–1119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J., C. Toulmin, and S. Williams. 2011. Sustainable intensification in African agriculture. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 9: 5–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Primdahl, J., and L.S. Kristensen. 2011. The farmer as a landscape manager: Management roles and change patterns in a Danish region. Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography 111(2): 107–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramos Santalla, N. 2000. La quinua, el grano de oro de los Incas ANAPQUI, una experiencia de desarrollo y manejo sostenible. La Paz: AOPEB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renting, H., and J.D. van der Ploeg. 2001. Reconnecting nature, farming and society: Environmental cooperatives in the Netherlands as institutional arrangements for creating coherence. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 3: 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, J.F., E. Huber-Sannwald, and J.E. Herrick. 2008. La sustentabilidad de la producción de la quinua en el altiplano sur de Bolivia: Aplicación del paradigma de desarrollo de zonas secas. Revista Habitat 75: 10–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigby, D., and D. Cáceres. 2001. Organic farming and the sustainability of agricultural systems. Agricultural Systems 68: 21–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues, E.R., L. Cullen Jr, T.P. Beltrame, A.V. Moscogliato, and I.C. da Silva. 2007. Avaliação econômica de sistemas agroflorestais implantados para recuperação de reserva legal no Pontal do Paranapanema, São Paulo. Revista Árvore 31: 941–948.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roling, N.G., and M.A.E. Wagemakers (eds.). 2000. Facilitating sustainable agriculture: Participatory learning and adaptive management in times of environmental uncertainty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherr, S.J., J.C. Milder, and L.E. Buck. 2012. Landscapes for people, food and nature: the vision, the evidence and next steps. Washington, DC: Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selman, P. 2009. Planning for landscape multifunctionality. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy 5: 45–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, D.A. 2004. Framing processes, ideology, and discursive fields. The Blackwell companion to social movements. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, D.A., and R.D. Benford. 1992. Master frames and cycles of protest. Frontiers in social movement theory. New Haven: Yale University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, D.A., S.A. Soule, and H. Kriesi. 2007. Mapping the terrain. The Blackwell companion to social movements. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • SSCA. 2012. Background information on the Saskatchewan Soil Conservation Association. http://www.ssca.ca/sscabio.html. Accessed 6 Dec 2014.

  • Swiderska, K. 2009. Protecting traditional knowledge: A holistic approach based on customary laws and bio-cultural heritage. Conserving and valuing ecosystem services and biodiversity: Economic, institutional and social challenges. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarrow, S. 1992. Mentalities, political cultures, and collective action frames. Frontiers in social movement theory. New Haven: Yale University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuma, E.H. 1965. Twenty-six centuries of agrarian reform: A comparative analysis. Oakland: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNDESA. 2012. The millennium development goals report 2012. New York: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valladares-Padua, C., S.M. Padua, and L. Cullen. 2002. Within and surrounding the Morro do Diabo State Park: Biological value, conflicts, mitigation and sustainable development alternatives. Environmental Science & Policy 5: 69–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Apeldoorn, D.F., K. Kok, M.P.W. Sonneveld, and T. Veldkamp. 2011. Panarchy rules: Rethinking resilience of agroecosystems, evidence from Dutch dairy-farming. Ecology and Society 16: 39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Ploeg, J.D. 2009. The new peasantries: Struggles for autonomy and sustainability in an era of empire and globalization. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, B., D. Smith, G. Shaw, D. Haak, and J. Fredette. 2010. Policy and program response to land management issues. In Landscapes transformed: The history of conservation tillage and direct seeding, ed. C.W. Lindwall, and B. Sonntag, 15–24. Saskatoon: Knowledge Impact and Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wezel, A., S. Bellon, T. Doré, C. Francis, D. Vallod, and C. David. 2011. Agroecology as a science, a movement and a practice. Sustainable Agriculture 2: 27–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winkel, T., H. Bertero, P. Bommel, J. Bourliaud, M. Chevarría Lazo, G. Cortes, and F. Léger. 2012. The sustainability of quinoa production in southern Bolivia: From misrepresentations to questionable solutions. Comments on Jacobsen (2011, J. Agron. Crop Sci. 197:390–399). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 198: 314–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiskerke, J.S.C., B.B. Bock, M. Stuiver, and H. Renting. 2003. Environmental co-operatives as a new mode of rural governance. NJAS—Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 51: 9–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittman, H. 2010. Agrarian reform and the environment: Fostering ecological citizenship in Mato Grosso, Brazil. Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d’études du développement 29: 281–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, W.F., Z.X. Dou, P. He, X.T. Ju, D. Powlson, D. Chadwick, and F.S. Zhang. 2013. New technologies reduce greenhouse gas emissions from nitrogenous fertilizer in China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110: 8375–8380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank KC Alvey for her excellent research assistance. We also thank David King, Claire Rhodes and Robin Marsh for their helpful input on the manuscript. We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Global Environment Facility and the United Nations Environment Programme. This study is a contribution of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative (http://landscapes.ecoagriculture.org).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA

    Abigail K. Hart & Jeffrey C. Milder

  2. EcoAgriculture Partners, 1100 17th Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC, 20036, USA

    Abigail K. Hart & Sara J. Scherr

  3. Department of Development Sociology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA

    Philip McMichael

Authors
  1. Abigail K. Hart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Philip McMichael
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeffrey C. Milder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sara J. Scherr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abigail K. Hart.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hart, A.K., McMichael, P., Milder, J.C. et al. Multi-functional landscapes from the grassroots? The role of rural producer movements. Agric Hum Values 33, 305–322 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-015-9611-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-015-9611-1

Keywords

  • Agriculture
  • Agroecology
  • Diversified farming systems
  • Farmer organization
  • Landscape
  • Multi-functional
  • Producer movements
  • Integrated landscape management