Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dynamics in farming systems: of changes and choices

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Farming Systems Research into the 21st Century: The New Dynamic

Abstract

Much changed in agriculture on the doorstep of the third millennium regarding farming practices and concepts in agricultural research. We discuss backgrounds of what was, what changed and what may happen as we increase our understanding of systems and their dynamics. We start with a brief review of the mechanistic approaches behind agricultural development which conceptualized change as a shift from one rather static state to another, as if it was ‘a war has to be won’. However, it increasingly became clear that farming systems, as a combination of biophysical and social-ecological systems, have their own dynamics: there is ‘a ghost in the machine’. We look at how farming systems, conceptualized as a sub-set of complex adaptive systems, co-evolve with their environment, a notion that we call ‘behaviours’. This dynamic conceptualisation helps to move towards adaptive approaches in agricultural development. The key point is that human agents can chose to ‘design’ sustainable farming, rather than to take easier ‘default’ options embedded in ‘locked-in’ regimes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Interestingly, both Von Thünen and Rosscher saw farming systems as organisms adapting to their environment (Nou 1967; Krabbe 1995), i.e. as self-organising complex adaptive systems ‘avant la lettre’.

  2. 2.

    See Hayami and Ruttan (1985) who base their analysis of agricultural systems on mechanistic notions and economics.

  3. 3.

    As an aside: mechanistic science may learn much about system behaviours from farmers, who tend to capture them in stories and metaphors.

  4. 4.

    As caveat on repetition of form with implications for design: logic indicates that as system behaviour moves up the ‘fractal ladder’ it may require ‘denser’ energy sources. e.g., moving nutrients at farm scale can be done by wheelbarrow, while needing trucks and fossil fuel at regional scale. The same could be true for small and large scale food sheds.

  5. 5.

    For example: 1  +  1  =  2 (one solution), √4  =  ± 2 (one problem, two solutions), √−1 (one problem, no solution… unless we start to re-interpret the rules of the game!).

  6. 6.

    Cutting many corners one may say that the amplitude of the ‘waves’ in Fig. 15.6 indicate the ‘resilience’ while the proximity to the central line indicates ‘stability’.

  7. 7.

    This emphasis on participatory processes and collective learning relates closely to the work on learning and collective action within Farming Systems Research (see e.g. LEARN 2000).

  8. 8.

    We use the term ‘transition’ to keep with literature on socio-technical transitions. It may be important to clarify that this term does not imply a ‘simple’ shift from one steady state to another. In keeping with complex adaptive systems, farming systems undergo constant change. However, building on the adaptive cycle, some periods are marked by rapid and disruptive changes, which is what ‘transitions’ refer to.

References

  • Ackoff, R. (1974). Redesigning the future: A systems approach to societal problems. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aczel, A. D. (2005). Descartes’ secret notebook. A true tale of mathematics, mysticism, and the quest to understand the universe. New York: Broadway Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armitage, D., Marschke, M., & Plummer, R. (2008). Adaptive co-management and the paradox of learning. Global Environmental Change, 18, 86–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, W. B. (1990). Positive feedbacks in the economy. Scientific American, 262, 92–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashby, R. W. (1958). Requisite variety and its implications for the control of complex systems. Cybernetica, 1, 83–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bawden, R. (2012). How should we farm? The ethical dimension of farming systems. In I. Darnhofer, D. Gibbon, & B. Dedieu (Eds.), Farming Systems Research into the 21st century: The new dynamic (pp. 119–139). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, J., & Peat, F. D. (1989). Turbulent mirror. An illustrated guide to chaos theory and the science of wholeness. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, R. (1962). Silent spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R., Pacey, A., & Thrupp, L. A. (1989). Farmers first: Farmer innovation and agricultural research. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chayanov, A. (1925). Peasant farm organisation. Moscow. (Reprinted 1966 In: D. Thorner, B. Kerblay, & R. E. F. Smith (Eds.), A.V. Chayanov on the theory of the peasant economy. Homewood: Irwin)

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. B. (1999). Systems thinking, systems practice, including a 30-year retrospective. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., & Stewart, I. (1994). The collapse of chaos: Discovering simplicity in a complex world. London: Viking Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conway, G. R. (1987). The properties of agro-ecosystems. Agricultural Systems, 24, 95–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway, G. R., & Barbier, E. B. (1990). After the green revolution. Sustainable agriculture for development. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coppock, D. L., Ellis, J. E., & Swift, D. M. (1986). Livestock feeding ecology and resource utilization in a nomadic pastoral ecosystem. Journal of Applied Ecology, 23, 573–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, T. (2010). Of models and meanings: Cultural resilience in social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 15, 19. From http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art19/

  • Crotty, R. (1980). Cattle, economics and development. Slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darnhofer, I., Fairweather, J., & Moller, H. (2010). Assessing a farm’s sustainability: Insights from resilience thinking. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 8, 186–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Wit, C. T., Huisman, H., & Rabbinge, R. (1987). Agriculture and its environment: Are there other ways? Agricultural Systems, 23, 211–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doré, T., Makowski, D., Malézieux, E., Munier-Jolain, N., Tchamitchian, M., & Tittonell, P. (2011). Facing up to the paradigm of ecological intensification in agronomy: Revisiting methods, concepts and knowledge. European Journal of Agronomy, 34, 197–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle, N. L. (2011). Adaptive capacity and its assessment. Global Environmental Change, 21, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elzen, B., Geels, F., & Green, K. (Eds.). (2004). System innovation and the transition to sustainability. Theory, evidence and policy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elzen, B., Geels, F., Leeuwis, C., & van Mierlo, B. (2011). Normative contestation in transitions in the making: Animal welfare concerns and system innovation in pig husbandry (1970–2008). Research Policy, 40, 263–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elzen, B., Barbier, M., Cerf, M., & Grin, J. (2012). Stimulating transitions towards sustainable farming systems. In I. Darnhofer, D. Gibbon, & B. Dedieu (Eds.), Farming Systems Research into the 21st century: The new dynamic (pp. 431–455). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO. (2006). Livestock’s long shadow. Environmental issues and options. Rome: FAO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fares, M., Magrini, M.-B., & Triboulet, P. (2011, forthcoming). Transition agro-écologique, innovation et verrouillage: Le rôle de la structure organisationnelle des filières [Agroecological transition, innovation and lock-in effects: The impact of the organisational design of supply chain]. Cahiers d’Agriculture, 21, 34–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., & Rockström, J. (2010). Resilience thinking: Integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology and Society, 15, 20. From http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art20/

  • Forrester, J. (1968). Principles of systems. Portland: Productivity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foxon, T. J., Reed, M. S., & Stringer, L. C. (2009). Governing long-term social-ecological change: What can the adaptive management and transition management approaches learn from each other? Environmental Policy and Governance, 19, 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, E., Dougill, A., Hubacek, K., Quinn, C., Sendzimir, J., & Termansen, M. (2011). Assessing vulnerability to climate change in dryland livelihood systems: Conceptual challenges and interdisciplinary solutions. Ecology and Society, 16, 3. From http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss3/art3/

  • Funtowicz, S., & Ravetz, J. (1994). The worth of a songbird: Ecological economics as a post-normal science. Ecological Economics, 10, 197–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geels, F. (2005). Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72, 681–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gharajedaghi, J. (2011). Systems thinking. Managing chaos and complexity. Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibon, A., Sheeren, D., Monteil, C., Ladet, S., & Balent, G. (2010). Modelling and simulating change in reforesting mountain landscapes using a social-ecological framework. Landscape Ecology, 25, 267–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grin, J., Felix, F., Bos, B., & Spoelstra, S. (2004). Practices for reflexive design: Lessons from a Dutch programme on sustainable agriculture. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy, 1, 126–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grin, J., Rotmans, J., Schot, J., Geels, F., & Loorbach, D. (Eds.). (2010). Transitions to sustainable development. New directions in the study of long term transformative change. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson, L. H., & Holling, C. S. (Eds.). (2002). Panarchy. Understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson, L. H., Holling, C. S., & Light, S. S. (Eds.). (1995). Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions. New York: Columbia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthman, J. (2004). Agrarian dreams. The paradox of organic farming in California. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayami, Y., & Ruttan, V. W. (1985). Agricultural development, an international perspective. Baltimore: Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, S. B. (1985). Redesigning the food system for sustainability. Alternative 12(3–4), 32–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, S. B. (1998). Redesigning agroecosystems for environmental sustainability: A deep systems approach. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 15, 391–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. M. (1996). Economics and evolution. Bringing life back into economics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. (2006). Studying complex adaptive systems. Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 19, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling, C. S. (1995). What barriers, what bridges? In L. H. Gunderson, C. S. Holling, & S. S. Light (Eds.), Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions (pp. 3–34). New York: Columbia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling, C. S., & Meffe, G. K. (1996). Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Conservation Biology, 10, 328–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horlings, L. G., & Marsden, T. K. (2011). Towards the real green revolution? Exploring the conceptual dimensions of a new ecological modernisation of agriculture that could ‘feed the world’. Global Environmental Change, 21, 441–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IAASTD. (2008). Agriculture at crossroads (International assessment of agricultural knowledge, science and technology for development). Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ison, R. L. (2012). Systems practice: Making the systems in Farming Systems Research effective. In I. Darnhofer, D. Gibbon, & B. Dedieu (Eds.), Farming Systems Research into the 21st century: The new dynamic (pp. 141–157). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ison, R. L., & Russell, D. B. (1999). Agricultural extension and rural development: Breaking out of traditions. A second-order systems perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ison, R. L., Maiteny, P. T., & Carr, S. (1997). Systems methodologies for sustainable natural resources research and development. Agricultural Systems, 55, 257–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klir, G. J. (1991). Facets of systems science (IFSR International series of system science and engineering, Vol. 15) (2nd ed., October 2001). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koestler, A. (1967). The ghost in the machine. London: Penguin, Arkana Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krabbe, J. J. (1995). Roscher’s organistic legacy. Journal of Economic Studies, 22, 159–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamine, C. (2011). Transition pathways towards a robust ecologization of agriculture and the need for system redesign. Cases from organic farming and IPM. Journal of Rural Studies, 27, 209–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langeveld, H., & Röling, N. (Eds.). (2006). Changing European farming systems for a better future: New visions for rural areas. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • LEARN. (2000). Cow up a tree. Knowing and learning for change in agriculture. Case studies from industrialised countries. Paris: INRA Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, G., & Stewart, N. (2003). The measurement of environmental performance: An application of Ashby’s law. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 20, 31–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockeretz, W. (1978). The lessons of the dust bowl. American Scientist, 66, 560–569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockie, S., & Halpin, D. (2005). The ‘conventionalisation’ thesis reconsidered: Structural and ideological transformation of Australian organic agriculture. Sociologia Ruralis, 45, 284–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press. (German edition 1984)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandelbrot, B. B. (2000). The fractal geometry of nature: Updated and augmented (19th printing). New York: Freeman and Cy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, G., Martin-Clouaire, R., Rellier, J. P., & Duru, M. (2011). A conceptual model of grassland-based beef systems. International Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Information Systems, 2, 20–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, G., Martin-Clouaire, R., & Duru, M. (2012, in press). Farming system design to cope with changing world: A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., & Randers, J. (1972). The limits to growth. A report for the Club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. New York: Universe Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meynard, J.-M., Dedieu, B., & Bos, B. (2012). Re-design and co-design of farming systems: An overview of methods and practices. In I. Darnhofer, D. Gibbon, & B. Dedieu (Eds.), Farming Systems Research into the 21st century: The new dynamic (pp. 405–429). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milone, P. (2009). Agriculture in transition. A neo-institutional analysis. Assen: Royal Van Gorcum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1985). Evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. W. (2002). The farming system approach: A historical perspective. Presentation at the 17th Symposium of the International Farming Systems Association, Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nou, J. (1967). Studies in the development of agricultural economics in Europe. Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksells Boktryckeri.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325, 419–422.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl, C. (2007). Transitions towards adaptive management of water facing climate and global change. Water Resources Management, 21, 49–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plucknett, D. L., & Smith, N. J. (1982). Agricultural research and Third World food production. Science, 217, 215–220.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ponting, C. (1991). A green history of the world. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J. (2008). Agricultural sustainability: Concepts, principles and evidence. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 363, 447–465.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, K., & Coutts, J. (1997). A broader approach to common resource management: Landcare and integrated catchment management in Queensland, Australia. Agricultural Research and Extension Network (Network Paper No. 70). London: ODI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N. (1996). Towards an interactive agricultural science; or are we Norsemen in Greenland? European Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 2, 35–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sautereau, N., & Bellon, S. (2010). Stimulate transitions towards sustainable agri-food systems: The contribution of conversion to organic food and farming to analyze dynamics and governance. Paper presented at the international workshop on System Innovations, Knowledge Regimes and Design Practices Towards Sustainable Agriculture, 16–18 June 2010, Lelystad.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheffer, M., & Westley, F. R. (2007). The evolutionary basis of rigidity: Locks in cells, minds, and society. Ecology and Society, 12, 36. From http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art36/

  • Scheffer, M., Westley, F., & Brock, W. (2003). Slow response of societies to new problems: Causes and costs. Ecosystems, 6, 493–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiere, J. B., & Grasman, J. (1996). Agro-ecosystem health, aggregation of systems in time and space. In: J. Van Bruchem (Ed.), Proceedings of a Seminar on Agro-ecosystem Health, 26 September 1996, Wageningen (pp. 23–26) (NRLO Report Nr. 97/31). The Hague: National Council for Agricultural Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiere, J. B., Baumhardt, R. L., Van Keulen, H., Whitbread, A. M., Bruinsma, A. S., Goodchild, A. V., Gregorini, P., Slingerland, M. A., & Hartwell, B. (2006). Mixed crop-livestock systems in semi-arid regions. In G. A. Peterson, P. W. Unger, & W. A. Payne (Eds.), Dryland agriculture (2nd ed., pp. 227–291). Agronomy Monograph 23. Madison: American Society of Agronomy; Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scoones, I. (Ed.). (1996). Living with uncertainty: New directions in pastoral development in Africa. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scoones, I., Leach, M., Smith, A., Stagl, S., Stirling, A., & Thompson, J. (2007). Dynamic systems and the challenge of sustainability (STEPS Working Paper 1). Brighton: STEPS Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1983). Poverty and famines. An essay on entitlement and deprivation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaner, W., Philipps, P., & Schmehl, W. (Eds.). (1982). Readings in Farming Systems Research and development (pp. 44–58). Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slicher van Bath, B. H. (1963). The agrarian history of Western Europe, A.D. 500–1850 (O. Ordish, Trans.). London: Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A., & Stirling, A. (2010). The politics of social-ecological resilience and sustainable socio-technical transitions. Ecology and Society, 15, 11. From http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss1/art11

  • Spiertz, J. H. (2010). Nitrogen, sustainable agriculture and food security. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 30, 43–55.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stakman, E. C., Bradfield, R., & Mangelsdorf, P. C. (1967). Campaigns against hunger. Cambridge: The Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stassart, P., & Jamar, D. (2009). Agriculture biologique et verrouillage des systèmes de connaissances. Conventionalisation des filières agroalimentaire bio. Innovations Agronomiques, 4, 313–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, I. N., & Peregoy, P. L. (1983). Catastrophe theory modelling in psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 94, 336–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, W. (1987). Critical heuristics of social systems design. European Journal of Operational Research, 31, 276–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNEP. (1992). Rio declaration on environment and development. A/CONF.151/26. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van De Ven, G., & Van Keulen, H. (2007). A mathematical approach to comparing environmental and economic goals in dairy farming: Identifying strategic development options. Agricultural Systems, 94, 231–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Der Ploeg, J. D. (2003). The virtual farmer. Past, present and future of the Dutch peasantry. Assen: Van Gorcum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandermeer, J. (1997). Syndromes of production: An emergent property of simple agroecosystem dynamics. Journal of Environmental Management, 51, 59–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanloqueren, G., & Baret, P. (2009). How agricultural research systems shape a technological regime that develops genetic engineering but locks out agroecological innovations. Research Policy, 38, 971–983.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vereijken, P. H. (1997). A methodical way of prototyping integrated and ecological arable farming systems (I/EAFS) in interaction with pilot farms. European Journal of Agronomy, 7, 235–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Thünen, J. H. (1826). Der isolierte Staat in Beziehung auf Landwirtschaft und Nationalökonomie [The isolated state in relation to agriculture and political economy]. Hamburg: Perthes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voß, J.-P., Newig, J., Kastens, B., Monstadt, J., & Nölting, B. (2007). Steering for sustainable development: A typology of problems and strategies with respect to ambivalence, uncertainty and distributed power. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 9, 193–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9, 5. From http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5

  • WCED. (1987). Our common future (World commission on environment and development). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westley, F., Carpenter, S., Brock, W., Holling, C. S., & Gunderson, L. (2002). Why systems of people and nature are not just social and ecological systems. In L. Gunderson & C. S. Holling (Eds.), Panarchy. Understanding transformations in human and natural systems (pp. 103–119). Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodhill, J. (2010). Sustainability, social learning and the democratic imperative: Lessons from the Australian landcare movement. In C. Blackmore (Ed.), Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 57–72). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements and Dedication

Thanks are due to Sarah N’Dipity and Wong Cilik for constantly motivating and critically questioning the authors. The first author dedicates his part in this paper to his son Marcus Jan who knows more than many of us what design can be, while making choices between emergent forms.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. La Ventana, Bennekom, The Netherlands

    J. B. (Hans) Schiere

  2. Department of Economic and Social Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria

    Ika Darnhofer

  3. INRA-ENSAT, UMR AGIR, Castanet, France

    Michel Duru

Authors
  1. J. B. (Hans) Schiere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ika Darnhofer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michel Duru
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. B. (Hans) Schiere .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Feistmantelstrasse 4, Vienna, 1180, Austria

    Ika Darnhofer

  2. Livelihood Systems, Agricultural and Rural, Shrewsbury Road 59, Church Stretton, SY6 6EX, Shropshire, United Kingdom

    David Gibbon

  3. , SAD, INRA, INRA - Clermont-Theix, Saint-Genes-Champanelle, 63122, France

    Benoît Dedieu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schiere, J.B.(., Darnhofer, I., Duru, M. (2012). Dynamics in farming systems: of changes and choices. In: Darnhofer, I., Gibbon, D., Dedieu, B. (eds) Farming Systems Research into the 21st Century: The New Dynamic. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4503-2_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation