Putting Sustainability into Practice in Agricultural Research for Development

  • P. G. Cox
  • N. D. MacLeod
  • A. D. Shulman
Chapter

Abstract

Within scientists’ research practices for improving agricultural resource management, their use of concepts of sustainability remains problematic. Sustainability means different things to different people, and in different contexts; it is ambiguous (Allen, 1993; MacLeod and Taylor, 1993, 1994) and contentious (Ison and Humphreys, 1993; Penman, 1994). Linguistic and communication analyses are providing convincing evidence that meanings of sustainability emerge from within the human communication environment (Penman, 1994; Shulman, 1996a,b). They argue that this environment is dynamic and, to a large extent, indeterminate. Penman (1994, in press) and Shulman (1996a; also, Shulman and Martinek, in press) have taken this further, suggesting that good scientist-constituent communication practices need to acknowledge that, because the situation is unique for each participant in time and space, differences in meanings will be the norm. Good negotiation uses this indeterminacy to open up possibilities for examining the adequacy of specific sustainability concepts in use.

Keywords

Agricultural Research Total Factor Productivity Ecological Economic Resource Stock Sustainability Concept 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, P. (ed.), 1993, Food for the Future. Conditions and Contradictions of Sustainability, Wiley: New York.Google Scholar
  2. Alston, J.M., Norton, G.W., and Pardey, P.G., 1995, Science Under Scarcity: Principles and Practice for Agricultural Research Evaluation and Priority Setting, Cornell University Press: Ithaca.Google Scholar
  3. Ayres, R.U., 1996, Statistical measures of unsustainability, Ecological Economics 16:239–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnett, V., Payne, R., and Steiner, R. (eds.), 1995, Agricultural Sustainability: Economic, Environmental and Statistical Considerations, Wiley: Chichester.Google Scholar
  5. Beckerman, W, 1995, Small is Stupid. Blowing the Whistle on the Greens, Duckworth: London.Google Scholar
  6. Conway, G.R., 1987, The properties of agroecosystems, Agricultural Systems 24:95–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Costanza, R., and Patten, B.C., 1995, Defining and predicting sustainability, Ecological Economics 15:193–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cox, P.G., MacLeod, N.D., Ridge, P.E., and Shulman, A.D., 1996, Reengineering agricultural R, D&E to support management decision-making: problems and prospects, Proc. 8th Aust. Agronomy Conf, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland (30 Jan–2 Feb 1996), Aust. Soc. of Agronomy, Carlton, pp. 168-171.Google Scholar
  9. Hansen, J.W., 1996, Is agricultural sustainability a useful concept?, Agricultural Systems 50:117–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Harrington, L.W., 1992, Measuring sustainability: issues and alternatives, J. for Farming Systems Research-Extension 3(1): 1–20.Google Scholar
  11. Ison, R., and Humphreys, C., 1993, Evaluation of’ sustainable Beef Productions Systems in Central Queensland’ Project, Dept of Crop Sciences, University of Sydney.Google Scholar
  12. Kelada, J.N., 1996, Integrating Reengineering with Total Quality, ASQC Quality Press: Milwaukee.Google Scholar
  13. Kelley, T.G., Ryan, J.G., and Patel, B.K., 1995, Applied participatory priority setting in international agricultural research: making trade-offs transparent and explicit, Agricultural Systems 49:177–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kula, E., 1994, Economics of Natural Resources, the Environment and Politics. 2nd ed.: Chapman & Hall, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leonard-Barton, D., 1995, Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation, Harvard Business School Press: Boston.Google Scholar
  16. Lynam, J.K., and Herdt, R.W., 1988, Sense and sustainability: sustainability as an objective in international agricultural research, Paper for CIP-Rockefeller Foundation Conference on Farmers and Food Systems, Lima, Peru.Google Scholar
  17. MacLeod, N.D., and Taylor, J.A., 1993, Sustainable grazing practices in Queensland, Australian Farm Manager 3(6):6–9.Google Scholar
  18. MacLeod, N.D., and Taylor, J.A., 1994, Perceptions of beef cattle producers and scientists relating to sustainable land use issues and their implications for technology transfer, The Rangeland Journal 16:238–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Macleod, N.D., and Shulman, A.D., Bridging the output-outcome gap in sustainability R&D — a fifth generation R&D punctuated arena model, Proc. 5th International UKSS Conference (7–11 July, 1997), United Kingdom Systems Society, Milton Keynes, in press.Google Scholar
  20. Milon, J.W, and Shogren, J.F. (eds.), 1995, Integrating Economic and Ecological Indicators: Practical Methods for Environmental Policy Analysis, Praeger Press, Westport.Google Scholar
  21. Monteith, J.L., 1990, Can sustainability be quantified? Indian Journal of Dryland Agricultural Research and Development 5(1/2): 1–15.Google Scholar
  22. Norgaard, R.B., 1995, Metaphors we might survive by, Ecological Economics 15:129–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Parton, K. A., 1996, Quality, quality assurance and quality improvement in agronomic research, Proc. 8th Aust. Agronomy Conf., University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland (30 Jan — 2 Feb 1996), Aust. Soc. of Agron., Carlton, pp. 43-46.Google Scholar
  24. Penman, R., 1994, Environmental matters and communication challenges, Aust, J. of Communication 21(3):26–39.Google Scholar
  25. Penman, R., The researcher in communication: the primary research position, in: Context and Communication Behavior (J. Owen, ed.), Context Press, Reno, in press.Google Scholar
  26. Penn, J., 1990, Towards an ecologically-based society: a Rawlsian perspective, Ecological Economics 2:225–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Price, C., 1993, Time, Discounting and Value, Blackwell: Oxford.Google Scholar
  28. Rabl, A., 1996, Discounting of long-term costs: What would future generations prefer us to do? Ecological Economics 17:137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Senge, P.M., 1990, The Fifth Discipline: the Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Doubleday: New York.Google Scholar
  30. Shulman, A.D., 1996a, Communicating science: opportunities and constraints for a scientist, in: Science Communication (D. Sless, ed.), pp. 55–68, Communication Research Press, Canberra.Google Scholar
  31. Shulman, A.D., 1996b, Putting group information technology in its place: communication and good work group performance, in: Handbook of Organisation Studies (S.R. Clegg, C. Handy, and W. Nord, eds.), pp. 357–374, Sage Publications, Newbury Park.Google Scholar
  32. Shulman, A. D., and Martinek, T., Managing institutional collaboration in catchment systems research, in: Farming Action: Catchment Reaction (J. Williams, ed.), CSIRO, Canberra, in press.Google Scholar
  33. Thompson, P.B., 1992, The varieties of sustainability, Agric, Human Values 9(3): 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van Dieren, W., 1995, Taking Nature into Account: A Report to the Club of Rome, Springer-Verlag: New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. G. Cox
    • 1
  • N. D. MacLeod
    • 2
  • A. D. Shulman
    • 3
  1. 1.International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid TropicsPatancheruIndia
  2. 2.CSIRO Tropical AgricultureSt LuciaAustralia
  3. 3.Communication Research Institute of AustraliaHackettAustralia

Personalised recommendations