Search

Determinants of farmer well-being can be derived from objective and subjective measures of social components, environmental sustainability indicators, and quality of life indices, as well as the multiple scales that farms and farmers operate. Yet, despite multiple frameworks on farmer well-being, the extent to which farmer-expressed values are used in the development of farmer well-being indicators is unclear. Challenges can arise from extracting indicators that are insufficiently grounded in place, or that inadequately incorporate context and biocultural relations and practices. Here in this scoping review, we synthesize the methodologies in the literature on assessing farmer well-being and identify the extent to which farmer well-being domains are derived from values expressed directly by farmers. We consolidated and coded 92 papers to respond to the following questions: (1) What are the most frequent farmer well-being domains in published studies? (2) What methods are used to elicit multidimensional farmer well-being domains? (3) Do well-being domains used in the literature adequately reflect a biocultural context, including place-based influences on well-being? Our results show that economics and social relationships are frequent domains of how farmer well-being is identified and assessed. These domains tend to be measured simultaneously, while less common domains, such as governance and place, are rather isolated. A suite of methods was used to assess well-being domains, ranging from basic surveys to in-depth participant observation. Yet, we identify gaps in the methods for deriving farmer well-being indicators. Specifically, methods that refer to farmer-expressed values were rare and domains identified through a place-based approach were often not recorded, but, arguably, critical in developing multidimensionality of farmer well-being. We show that while the translocal approach is well represented in established well-being frameworks, farmer expression is not foundational in well-being assessments but is needed in order to center farmer values when generating indicators of well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of People & Nature is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

A confluence of discoveries in ecology and agriculture suggests that biodiversity can help address the sustainability problems facing modern intensive agriculture. Here we explore several questions related to this possibility. Can increases in national crop diversity help increase the stability and security of national food systems? Can practices based on greater crop biodiversity produce yields that compete with those obtained through the long-standing, high-input monoculture model? What are the appropriate levels and combinations of crops to be used? We highlight recent research that suggests it is time to begin unlocking the agricultural potential of biodiversity — from the level of crop genetic diversity to species diversity — and to do so on spatial scales from individual fields to nations. Recent research suggests that the biodiversification of agriculture may lead to greater and more stable yields, decrease land clearing, and lower the use of harmful agrochemicals. Just four plant species — wheat, rice, maize and soybeans — provide more than 60% of the calories we consume. In this Essay, Delphine Renard and David Tilman discuss the risks of monoculture and how the biodiversification of agriculture may lead to greater and more stable yields, minimize land clearing, and reduce the use of harmful agrochemicals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Managing multiple ecosystem services (ES), including addressing trade-offs between services and preventing ecological surprises, is among the most pressing areas for sustainability research. These challenges require ES research to go beyond the currently common approach of snapshot studies limited to one or two services at a single point in time. We used a spatiotemporal approach to examine changes in nine ES and their relationships from 1971 to 2006 across 131 municipalities in a mixed-use landscape in Quebec, Canada. We show how an approach that incorporates time and space can improve our understanding of ES dynamics. We found an increase in the provision of most services through time; however, provision of ES was not uniformly enhanced at all locations. Instead, each municipality specialized in providing a bundle (set of positively correlated ES) dominated by just a few services. The trajectory of bundle formation was related to changes in agricultural policy and global trends; local biophysical and socioeconomic characteristics explained the bundles' increasing spatial clustering. Relationships between services varied through time, with some provisioning and cultural services shifting from a trade-off or no relationship in 1971 to an apparent synergistic relationship by 2006. By implementing a spatiotemporal perspective on multiple services, we provide clear evidence of the dynamic nature of ES interactions and contribute to identifying processes and drivers behind these changing relationships. Our study raises questions about using snapshots of ES provision at a single point in time to build our understanding of ES relationships in complex and dynamic social-ecological systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]