Integrated Assessment of the Sustainability and Resilience of Farming Systems : Lessons from the Past and Ways Forward for the Future

This chapter assessed sustainability and resilience of eleven farming systems in their current situation, as well as in hypothetical future systems, using qualitative and quantitative methods. The assessment shows that current farming systems address sustainability dimensions in an unbalanced way and are characterized by poor resilience. Future resilient systems are imagined to promote environmental and social functions in the long term

D5.6 Impacts of improved strategies and policy options on the resilience of farming systems across the EU

Resilience is the ability to deal with shocks and stresses, including the unknown and previously unimaginable, such as the Covid19 crisis. The aim of this paper is to assess responses of farming systems (FS) to this crisis and to assess them from the perspective of resilience thinking. We build on a resilience framework developed in the SURE‐Farm project and on ongoing resilience assessments in 11 FS across Europe through which we have an in‐depth understanding of the ‘pre‐Covid19 situation’ in each FS. This includes insights whether an FS has an enabling (or constraining) environment, who are the relevant system actors beyond farms, and what are the social, economic and ecological functions to be delivered by the system. The analysis allows us to understand which resilience resources and strategies were mobilised in different FS and thereby to explain differences in the ability of FS to cope with and respond to the crisis. Furthermore, the approach enables us to put crisis responses in a broader resilience perspective and to assess whether responses might enhance (or constrain) future resilience. Thus, our analysis allows to draw policy and industry relevant conclusions how to increase resilience of farming systems

D6.2 Report on combinations of conditions for successful and unsuccessful fostering of resilience in agricultural sectors

Farming systems (FS) operate in biophysical, political, social, economic and cultural environments which are often far from stable. Frequently or unfavourably changing conditions can affect FS performance, i.e., the delivery of FS functions (such as food production or ecosystem services). The aim of task 6.1 is to identify principles for an enabling environment to foster (rather than hinder) resilient farming systems in Europe. Task 6.2 will translate these principles into roadmaps that will contain recommendations for both public and private actors and institutions in the enable environment on how to support farming system resilience. A farming system is a system hierarchy level above the farm at which properties emerge resulting from formal and informal interactions and interrelations among farms and non-farm actors to the extent that these mutually influence each other. The environment can then be defined as the context of a farming system on which farming system actors have no or little influence. Hence, actors belonging to the environment may be food processors, retailers, financial institutions, technology providers, consumers, policy makers, etc. Fostering FS resilience is done through (re)designing institutions and building and mobilising resources in order to enhance resilience enabling attributes of FS (and remove resilience constraining attributes). These institutions can be both part of the FS and part of an enabling environment, consisting of private actors (such as food processors, retailers, banks, etc.) and public actors (government agencies). Four archetypical patterns according to which challenges are insufficiently addressed to foster FS resilience have been identified. Six general principles underpinning patterns that enable FS resilience have been formulated. An important challenge is that FS and enabling environments should always find a good balance between addressing challenges in the short run and dealing with challenges in the long run

Social Cohesion as the Missing Link between Natural Resource Management and Peacebuilding: Lessons from Cocoa Production in Côte d’Ivoire and Colombia

Social cohesion plays a key role in processes of peacebuilding and sustainable development. Fostering social cohesion might present a potential to enhance the connection of natural resource management and peacebuilding and better functioning of sustainable land use systems. This contribution explores the nexus between social cohesion, natural resource management, and peacebuilding. We do so by (1) reviewing literature on the three concepts and (2) studying four different key action areas in the context of sustainable cocoa production for their potential to enhance social cohesion, namely (a) agroforestry; (b) cooperatives; (c) certification schemes; and (d) trade policies. Research is based on experience from cocoa production in two post-conflict countries, Côte d’Ivoire and Colombia. Our findings show that by fostering environmentally sustainable agricultural practices, these key action areas have a clear potential to foster social cohesion among cocoa producers and thus provide a valuable contribution to post-conflict peacebuilding in both countries. However, the actual effects strongly depend on a multitude of local factors which need to be carefully taken into consideration. Further, the focus in implementation of some of these approaches tends to be on increasing agricultural productivity and not directly on fostering cocoa farmers’ wellbeing and societal relations, and hence a shift toward social objectives is needed in order to strengthen these approaches as a part of overall peacebuilding strategies.Peer Reviewe

D5.3 Resilience assessment of current farming systems across the European Union

For improving sustainability and resilience of EU farming system, the current state needs to be assessed, before being able to move on to future scenarios. Assessing sustainability and resilience of farming systems is a multi-faceted research challenge in terms of the scientific domains and scales of integration (farm, household, farming system level) that need to be covered. Hence, in SURE-Farm, multiple approaches are used to evaluate current sustainability and resilience and its underlying structures and drivers. To maintain consistency across the different approaches, all approaches are connected to a resilience framework which was developed for the unique purposes of SURE-Farm. The resilience framework follows five steps: 1) the farming system (resilience of what?), 2) challenges (resilience to what?), 3) functions (resilience for what purpose?), 4) resilience capacities, 5) resilience attributes (what enhances resilience?). The framework was operationalized in 11 case studies across the EU. Applied approaches differ in disciplinary orientation and the farming system process they focus on. Three approaches focus on risk management: 1) a farm survey with a main focus on risk management and risk management strategies, 2) interviews on farmers’ learning capacity and networks of influence, and 3) Focus Groups on risk management. Two approaches address farm demographics: 4) interviews on farm demographics, and 5) AgriPoliS Focus Group workshops on structural change of farming systems from a (farm) demographics perspective. One approach applied so far addresses governance: 6) the Resilience Assessment Tool that evaluates how policies and legislation support resilience of farming systems. Two methods address agricultural production and delivery of public and private goods: 7) the Framework of Participatory Impact Assessment for sustainable and resilient farming systems (FoPIA-SURE-Farm), aiming to integrate multiple perspectives at farming system level, and 8) the Ecosystem Services assessment that evaluates the delivery of public and private goods. In a few case studies, additional methods were applied. Specifically, in the Italian case study, additional statistical approaches were used to increase the support for risk management options (Appendix A and Appendix B). Results of the different methods were compared and synthesized per step of the resilience framework. Synthesized results were used to determine the position of the farming system in the adaptive cycle, i.e. in the exploitation, conservation, release, or reorganization phase. Dependent on the current phase of the farming system, strategies for improving sustainability and resilience were developed. Results were synthesized around the three aspects characterizing the SURE-Farm framework, i.e. (i) it studies resilience at the farming system level, (ii) considers three resilience capacities, and (iii) assesses resilience in the context of the (changing) functions of the system. (i) Many actors are part of the farming system. However, resilience-enhancing strategies are mostly defined at the farm level. In each farming system multiple actors are considered to be part of the system, such as consultants, neighbors, local selling networks and nature organizations. The number of different farming system actors beyond the focal farmers varies between 4 (in French beef and Italian hazelnut systems) and 14 (large-scale arable systems in the UK). These large numbers of actors illustrate the relevance of looking at farming system level rather than at farm level. It also suggests that discussions about resilience and future strategies need to embrace all of these actors. (ii) At system level there is a low perceived capacity to transform. Yet, most systems appear to be at the start of a period in which (incremental) transformation is required. At system level, the capacity to transform is perceived to be relatively low, except in the Romanian mixed farming system. The latter may reflect a combination of ample room to grow and a relatively stable environment (especially when compared to the past 30 to 50 years). The relatively low capacity to transform in the majority of systems is not in line with the suggestion that most systems are at the start of (incremental) transformation, or, at least, reached a situation in which they can no longer grow. Further growth is only deemed possible in the Belgium dairy, Italian hazelnut, Polish fruit and Romanian mixed farming systems. (iii) System functions score well with regard to the delivery of high-quality and safe food but face problems with quality of rural life and protecting biodiversity. Resilience capacities can only be understood in the context of the functions to be delivered by a farming system. We find that across all systems required functions are a mix of private and public goods. With regard to the capacity to deliver private goods, all systems perform well with respect to high-quality and safe food. Viability of farm income is regarded moderate or low in the livestock systems in Belgium (dairy), France (beef) and Sweden (broilers), and the fruit farming system in Poland. Across all functions, attention is especially needed for the delivery of public goods. More specifically the quality of rural life and infrastructure are frequently classified as being important, but currently performing bad. Despite the concerns about the delivery of public goods, many future strategies still focus on improving the delivery of private goods. Suggestions in the area of public goods include among others the implementation of conservation farming in the UK arable system, improved water management in the Italian hazelnut system, and introduction of technologies which reduce the use of herbicides in Polish fruit systems. It is questionable whether these are sufficient to address the need to improve the maintenance of natural resources, biodiversity and attractiveness of rural areas. With regard to the changing of functions over time, we did not find evidence for this in our farming systems

Le potentiel transformateur de la responsabilité sociale des entreprises dans la chaîne mondiale du cacao et du chocolat : aperçu des pratiques de certification de la durabilité au Ghana

Cette étude examine les implications de la responsabilité sociale des entreprises (RSE) des entreprises transnationales (ETN) appliquée à leurs chaînes de valeur. Prenant le cas d'un projet de certification de la durabilité du cacao UTZ au Ghana, l'étude analyse le processus de mise en œuvre d’un projet de la RSE et ses résultats localement. La chaîne mondiale du cacao et du chocolat (GCCC) est un cas particulièrement intéressant pour cette étude car elle est confrontée à des défis complexes en matière de durabilité, notamment l'extrême pauvreté des planteurs de cacao et la dégradation de l'environnement dans les zones de production. Par conséquent, des multiples projets de RSE se sont généralisés au cours des dernières décennies. L'étude interroge comment les stratégies de RSE affectent les conditions de durabilité et qui en bénéficie finalement. Ainsi, elle met l'accent sur les changements dans l'organisation du secteur cacao au niveau local au Ghana et sur les perspectives futures des planteurs de cacao. L'étude révèle que la RSE aide plutôt les ETN à accroître leur influence sur la production locale de cacao au lieu de surmonter les principaux défis de durabilité dans la GCCC.This study engages with the implications of a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) of Transnational Corporations (TNCs) in their supply chains. Taking the case of an UTZ cocoa sustainability certification project in Ghana, the study examines the implementation process of a transnational CSR intervention and its local outcomes. The Global Cocoa-Chocolate Chain (GCCC) is a particular interesting case for this study because the GCCC is facing complex sustainability challenges, most notably the extreme poverty of millions of cocoa farmers and environmental degradation in production areas, and therefore, CSR projects became widespread over the past decades. The study explores how CSR strategies affect sustainability conditions in a supply chain and who is finally benefitting from it. Thereby, it puts a particular emphasis on changes in the organization of the local level Ghana’s cocoa sector linked to CSR and in farmers perspectives. The study reveals that CSR rather helps TNCs to increase their influence over local cocoa production instead of overcoming key sustainability challenges in the GCCC

Certification privée pour la production de cacao durable et ses transformations locales: Aperçus depuis le Ghana

International audienceBased on a UTZ certification project in Ghana, this article analyzes the transformations occurring in the functioning of the cacao sector at the local level. The certification system put in place using a private-private partnership is effective in terms of technical support and agricultural training and seems to have a positive impact on productivity. But the life circumstances of producers and their position in the sector are not improved in a sustainable way; rather, we find reinforced asymmetries.À partir d’un projet de certification d’UTZ au Ghana, l’article analyse les transformations du fonctionnement de la filière du cacao au niveau local. Le système de certification mis en place en partenariat privé-privé est efficace en termes d’accompagnement technique et de formation agricole et semble avoir un impact positif sur la productivité. Mais les conditions de vie des producteurs et leur position dans la filière ne sont pas améliorées de manière durable, on trouve plutôt des asymétries renforcées

Societal dynamics of sustainability certification in Ghanaian cocoa producing communities: Assessing social cohesion effects and their implications for collective action

In the global cocoa-chocolate chain, sustainability certification became the most widely applied industry tool to respond to sustainability challenges, such as extreme poverty among cocoa producers, and related issues of child labor and deforestation. This contribution analyzes how sustainability certification shapes broader social dynamics in targeted communities by applying the concept of social cohesion. This framework allows for the discussion on the appropriateness of sustainability certification to foster the needed societal conditions for community empowerment and collective action, both of which often regarded as key for a broader sustainability transition. Insights from key informant interviews in two Ghanaian cocoa communities targeted by a Rainforest Alliance cocoa sustainability project indicate that there is an enhanced interaction between scheme participants leading to new ingroup-outgroup patterns among community members. Further, while some informal institutions and one particular societal group are negatively affected by the sustainability intervention, no broader effect on communities’ overall social cohesion was measured. Finally, despite contributing to the greening of cocoa production, certification implements measures that risk to hamper the spread of collective action and may dilute the “societal glue” in targeted communities

Participatory assessment of critical thresholds for resilient and sustainable European farming systems

Farming systems in Europe are experiencing multiple stresses and shocks that may push systems beyond critical thresholds after which system change is expected to occur. These critical thresholds may lie in the economic, environmental, social and institutional domain. In this paper we take a participatory approach with involvement of farming system stakeholders to assess the presence of critical thresholds in 11 European farming systems, and the potential consequence of surpassing those with regard to system sustainability and resilience. First, critical thresholds of the main challenges, key system variables and their interactions in the studied farming systems were assessed. Second, participants assessed the potential developments of the key system variables in case critical thresholds for main system challenges would be exceeded. All studied systems were perceived to be close, at or beyond at least one identified critical threshold. Stakeholders were particularly worried about economic viability and food production levels. Moreover, critical thresholds were perceived to interact across system levels (field, farm, farming system) and domains (social, economic, environmental), with low economic viability leading to lower attractiveness of the farming system, and in some farming systems making it hard to maintain natural resources and biodiversity. Overall, a decline in performance of all key system variables was expected by workshop participants in case critical thresholds would be exceeded. For instance, a decline in the attractiveness of the area and a lower maintenance of natural resources and biodiversity. Our research shows that concern for exceeding critical thresholds is justified and that thresholds need to be studied while considering system variables at field, farm and farming system level across the social, economic and environmental domains. For instance, economic variables at farm level (e.g. income) seem important to detect whether a system is approaching critical thresholds of social variables at farming system level (e.g. attractiveness of the area), while in multiple case studies there are also indications that approaching thresholds of social variables (e.g. labor availability) are indicative for approaching economic thresholds (e.g. farm income). Based on our results we also reflect on the importance of system resources for stimulating sustainability and resilience of farming systems. We therefore stress the need to include variables that reflect system resources such as knowledge levels, attractiveness of rural areas and general well-being of rural residents when monitoring and evaluating the sustainability and resilience of EU farming systems

Integrated Assessment of the Sustainability and Resilience of Farming Systems : Lessons from the Past and Ways Forward for the Future

This chapter assessed sustainability and resilience of eleven farming systems in their current situation, as well as in hypothetical future systems, using qualitative and quantitative methods. The assessment shows that current farming systems address sustainability dimensions in an unbalanced way and are characterized by poor resilience. Future resilient systems are imagined to promote environmental and social functions in the long term