Search

Agriculture and other land use practices have severely affected the quality of soils and food production systems in South Africa. In addition, these practices significantly contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Soil quality is generally associated with soil organic matter (SOM) along with elemental Carbon (C) and Nitrogen (N). Approximately 58% of South African soils contain <0.5% organic C, 38% contain 0.5–2% organic C, and 4% contain >2% organic C. The extensive aridity and lack of SOM content in South African soils cause them to lack resilience and have a delicate nature compared to soils in temperate regions. In a country where almost 60% of the land is degraded, and 91% is prone to desertification, farming practices require a revised framework for land management. The challenge of producing food on degraded land that is often water-scarce and particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change is a threat to South Africa's food and nutritional security. Therefore, this review aims to equip farmers with knowledge and principles of innovative and sustainable alternatives such as regenerative agriculture that naturally and progressively improves soil quality/fertility and ecosystem health; and reduces GHG emissions through carbon sequestration. Quantitative studies in South Africa show that during 5–90 years of crop cultivation in the Free State province resulted in a 10–73% reduction in C and N relative to natural grasslands. Similar studies reported a 50% reduction in C after 50 years of cultivation on Hutton soil in Pretoria; and a 50% reduction in C after only 3.5 years of cultivation in the Free State. Considering that the world's food systems are responsible for more than a third of anthropogenic GHG emissions, we are convinced that the shifting trend toward regenerative agriculture is a sustainable climate-smart solution for global food production systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human activities are responsible for emitting greenhouse gases (GHGs) that contribute to global warming and climate change. As the world's second-largest producer of staple food and the third-largest emitter of GHGs, India has been witnessing an increase in demand for food and energy, resulting in increased emissions. Thus, to achieve net carbon neutrality by 2070, India must focus urgently on climate change mitigation. Its agriculture sector has the potential to transition from being a net emitter to a net absorber of GHGs by adopting sustainable farming practices such as zero tillage, laser-assisted precision land leveling, direct seeding of rice, intercropping, biochar application, use of solar energy, and more efficient management of irrigation water, soil nutrients, livestock feed, and manure. To incentivize climate consciousness, a voluntary carbon credit trading system could be utilized in agriculture, supported by a measurement, monitoring, reporting, and verification platform. This system would also bring about social, environmental, and financial co-benefits for its stakeholders. Specifically, the agriculture sector could substantially reduce the country's annual emissions by 84% from 2019 to 2070. But to realize their potential, the carbon markets must overcome the limitations currently set by policy, economic, cultural, and biophysical factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The notion of principles, and the sense that they are different from but closely linked to practices, is deeply rooted in the agronomy literature. However, these terms are currently used by different authors to mean very different things. This paper explores these various uses and meanings. We argue that an understanding of the use of apparently innocuous, everyday words like principles and practices provides a valuable insight into on-going debates, contestation and politics about the future of agriculture and food. In the case of principles, it is important to understand the forms they take, by whom they are proclaimed and for what purpose(s). We find that while most alternative agricultures define themselves through a set of principles, these do not challenge or undermine the scientific principles that underpin mainstream agronomy. Further, we argue that to articulate and proclaim principles is to seek to exercise discursive power. Specifically, proclaiming principles or defining a favoured approach to agriculture by articulating a specific set of principles, is to exert authority, bolster legitimacy and claim a place in a crowded and contested marketplace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, the need for profound changes in agricultural practices has become increasingly acknowledged, and it has given rise to an intense, and rapidly intensifying, debate among experts and in the media. Before the general framework under which this debate currently unfolds become too set in stone, it would seem useful to devote some time to a reflexion on how discussions should be approached in order to have the best chance to result in practically workable, sustainable solutions. In a recent, provocative article, Amundson (2022) voiced very strong opinions in this respect. In particular, he criticizes the emergence in the general public of "we" visions about alternate forms of agriculture, he argues that key current stakeholders (i.e. farmers) imperatively have to be included in the discussions, and he opines that the debate should not attempt to solve "social wicked problems", which tend to remain long-standing because no one can manage to solve them. In the present article, I propose an in-depth reflexion on these three aspects of the debate, and adopt very different perspectives than Amundson's (2022). After decades of laboriously trying to get members of the general public engaged with soils and agricultural issues, "we" visions with which members of the public may come up need to be resolutely welcomed, carefully analyzed, and responded to, soon after they emerge. Furthermore, I argue that stakeholders who are currently in the agricultural sector may not necessarily be the most likely to eventually implement changes and therefore should not be allowed to sway the debate in a direction that suits them in the short run. Finally, I contend that the lack of willingness, or the reluctance, of decision-makers and the private sector to envisage fundamental changes, thereby giving the impression that some problems cannot be readily solved, should not constrain in any way the scope of the reflexion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper introduces the Outlook on Agriculture Special Issue on biomimicry and nature-based solutions. It provides a selective overview that will help frame and situate the collection, with a particular focus on agriculture and food production. The relationship between agriculture and nature is a central concern, and particularly how this relationship is framed by those promoting the idea that to overcome the multiple challenges it faces, agriculture must (re)turn to nature. The significance of different understandings of 'nature-based solutions', and the relative importance of biomimicry, are explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]