Reframing Sustainabilities: From Improving Agriculture to Rethinking the Food System

Authors

Gorka Díaz Merino

MSc Sustainable Design Student 

Aalborg University (Copenhagen)

Marika Zamelek

MSc Sustainable Design Student

Aalborg University (Copenhagen)

In this blog post we will continue to challenge the mainstream perspective of the future from a Sustainable Transitions perspective, this time on Danish agriculture. Current Danish agriculture is very focused on conventional agriculture and a long supply chain of food systems and is the 3rd most polluting sector and taking around 61% of the land (Denmark’s National Inventory Report, 2020). Moreover, 75% of the agricultural space is designated for growing animal feed which significantly increases Greenhouse Gas emissions. The whole system aggravates problems like Climate Change and extensive land use. (The Danish AgriFish Agency, Ministry of Environment and Food, 2016; Hauggaard-Nielsen, 2022). 

Here we will discuss the current mainstream approach to sustainability in the Danish agricultural sector and the issues it problematizes. We will show how this approach is locked in the current paradigm, explore more radical problematizations arising from alternative views and demonstrate how a broader scope is necessary if we are to transition to truly sustainable practices. We will use ‘Strategic Niche Management (SNM)’ as a framework to understand sustainable innovation journeys, where a series of internal processes are key to the success of innovative emergent socio-technical systems (or niches) in achieving a change in the dominant system (or regime) (Schot and Geels, 2008). To further develop strategies to address sustainability issues from this framing, we will use the learnings from both SNM and Transition Management (Roorda et al., 2012), a governance approach based on the insights from transition studies.

Divergent Problematizations in Danish Agriculture

In Danish agriculture, current notions of sustainability concern the use of pesticides and other chemicals and low efficiency as the main concerns. Thus, the Organic Agriculture certification has become synonymous with sustainable agriculture for many. It prohibits the use of inorganic fertilizers, chemical pesticides and GMOs. Organically certified products are more and more common and accessible in Danish supermarkets, and organic farms account for around 12% of the farmland (Danish Agriculture & Food Council, 2019).

Moreover, the Danish Agriculture and Food Council relies on international food demand to argue that food production needs to remain an intensive practice while still reducing its impact (Sustainable Intensive Production – Growth in balance, n.d.).  However, the narrative that intensification is a necessary measure is contested even in current paradigm thinking (e.g. Bluwstein, Braun and Henriksen (2015) found that upscaling an extensively managed farm model to national level could cut down GHG emissions while maintaining sufficient output for human consumption). 

We find that in order to reach sustainable solutions, a different problematization must be undertaken. A Sustainable Transitions perspective requires entire socio-technical systems to be challenged and radically changed, and sustainable socio-technical niches in agriculture and food systems give us an idea of broader problematizations than the regime: 

Regenerative agriculture is an agricultural practice that seeks “improv[ing] the health of soil or to restore highly degraded soil, which symbiotically enhances the quality of water, vegetation and land-productivity” (Rhodes, 2017). Another clear problematization that is not considered in mainstream approaches is the need for a drastic dietary shift away from animal product consumption. It would not only reduce greenhouse gas emission but also could cut down the farmland designated for producing animal feed. Moving towards a locally sourced plant-based diet is necessary to ensure a sustainable transition (Rust et al., 2020). Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) is a subscription-based system where customers buy shares of farm harvest, and receive sustainably sourced seasonal vegetables or fruits periodically. It problematizes a different aspect of the food value chain: logistics and distribution, along with the intermediary networks between producer and consumer. Urban agriculture and self-consumption are a movement away from the separation of agricultural land and urban setting, with consumers becoming local producers. They can take the form of a community-managed parcel or an individual outdoor or indoor vegetable garden. These alternative systems challenge the entire value chain. 

A radical systemic change entails multiple socio-technical factors, and all the value chain is susceptible to be redesigned. Thus, the agricultural sector is too limited and we need to broaden the scope of what needs to be changed – the food system.

Below we propose two different design strategies to strengthen sustainable socio-technical niches with learnings from Strategic Niche Management and Transition Management. These strategies are meant to shield the niche from the selection environment and produce new socio-technical arrangements that increase their ability to thrive and grow in new networks with more agency and transformation potential.

Strategy 1: Strengthening regenerative CSAs through Strategic Niche Management

Our first strategy focuses on creating a resilient network between the niche of Regenerative CSA and other relevant actors and initiatives. The idea is to protect the niche from the selection environment by generating alternative local connections with non-regime initiatives and engaging in dialogue with regulators and municipalities.

The exposure of regenerative CSAs is limited. The practice of grocery shopping is locked in, and organic products in supermarkets already give most people a sense of fulfillment of their responsibilities as an environmentally aware consumer. Food markets are scarce, and most citizens do not know the ins and outs of regenerative agriculture or CSAs.

In this context, eco and organic villages, street food hubs and local events are key potential partnerships that deviate from the regime of food-buying but succeed to capture social attention. We propose an intensive partnership with sites like the street food market in Reffen, the organic village at BaneGaarden, or the market Torvehallerne in Nørreport. These are places that offer a lot of exposure and already hold similar visions. By expressing shared expectations, supplying them with regenerative products and lobbying together for municipal support in the creation of similar initiatives of public interest, regenerative markets would increase their exposure, their resilience and their combined power due to the expanded network. Dialogue with the different municipalities will be crucial to secure space in different parts of the city, intended to increase access for consumers. Getting financial support from the municipalities to reach equal or below-market prices to ensure competitiveness will be the main shielding strategy.

As part of lobbying for relevant cultural initiatives, food hubs would be proposed. These would be a meeting place for farmers who are selling their sustainably grown products to private customers, and also a workshop environment for interested chefs and nutritionists. The customers could collect their food products from their CSA subscription and workshops to learn about nutrition and seasonal vegetables.

Figure 1. Possible formation of a new network to increase resilience and exposure.

Strategy 2: A Transition Management process for Urban Farming

Our second strategy involves the strengthening of Urban Farming as a niche through a transition management process that explores new implementation opportunities, produces key stakeholder alliances whose interests support the common vision, and legitimizes the niche through the formation of ties to formal institutions.

There is a multitude of urban farming initiatives spread across Copenhagen region, but they are fairly disconnected and they face several challenges on their own and as an expanding practice: many regulations are undefined due to the relative newness of Urban Farming; greenhouse infrastructure requirements and rooftop specifications are an adoption barrier for interested communities, and commercialization of their products proves difficult without appropriate exposure. New opportunities are also considerable: new, green development plans are emerging, the city is a pioneer in the incorporation of green roofs in large buildings through its Climate Plan, and there is a growing trend of local urban farming initiatives. 

Arranging firstly a small Transition Team with urban planners, municipality representatives and regulators and some experts on Urban Farming around the issue of implementation of Urban Farming, the process would start by exploring the city dynamics. Policy synergies such as the Climate Plan, other Urban Farming initiatives, potential drivers and barriers, and related regulation are to be uncovered in this stage, and a full analysis is to be conducted. Potentially favorable stakeholders and interested communities would then be invited to the discussion. These could include communities of neighbors, eco-villages, businesses or social organizations. The process would follow with a challenge framing and developing a common vision of the future to then backcast and develop transition paths. Here the interests of all the stakeholders would have crystallized, ensuring a higher degree of support from all parties in the strengthening of urban farming and generating new opportunities. Finally, a series of transition experiments would be carried out with all the learnings and agency developed previously, to generate greater momentum and grow beyond the closed network of the initial group of stakeholders.

Figure 2. Process scheme of uncovering and linking new actors. 

Both experiments are intended to yield results in terms of learnings, network creation and strengthening existing socio-technical niches by increasing their resilience and building their agency through ties to other networks. Both can create a more resilient alternative food system supported by expanding networks of actors with a “stake” in the initiative. 

Concluding thoughts

These proposed initiatives demonstrate two main points. First, the need for a different, broader framing of the challenges related to food systems. The current paradigm is narrowingly focusing on agriculture as an industrial means of producing food. But in order to achieve radical systemic change, we need to move away from simplistic notions such as sectors and focus on socio-technical systems. It is not a matter of only rethinking the way food is produced, but the entire food system. 

Second, the need for a strong concept of sustainability at the center of the (re)design of socio-technical systems. Not only do they have to be structurally different, but the core concept behind it has to be sustainability. Mainstream approaches try to balance sustainability with a plethora of preexisting conditions and elements, whereas truly sustainable solutions necesitate sustainability as the starting point of the transition. 

References

Hauggaard-Nielsen, H. and Kirstine Aare, A., 2022. Klima på gaflen - omstilling af dansk landbrug • POV. [online] POV International. Available at: <https://pov.international/innovation-klima-pa-gaflen/?fbclid=IwAR3bLTLNRXIuuAH_dk8Amj3eNjIPtCN11fLYyWrMuWdb73oZITUjByQBJbM> [Accessed 29 March 2022].

Bluwstein, J., Braun, M. and Henriksen, C., 2015, Sustainable Extensification as an Alternative Model For Reducing GHG Emissions From Agriculture. The Case of an Extensively Managed Organic Farm in Denmark, Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 39(5), pp.551-579.

n.d. Sustainable Intensive Production – Growth in balance. [PDF] Available at: <https://agricultureandfood.dk/-/media/agricultureandfood/about-us/sustainable-production/sustainable-intensive-production.pdf> [Accessed 26 March 2022].

Nielsen, O.-K., Plejdrup, M.S., Winther, M., Nielsen, M., Gyldenkærne, S., Mikkelsen, M.H., Albrektsen, R., Thomsen, M., Hjelgaard, K., Fauser, P., Bruun, H.G., Johannsen, V.K., Nord-Larsen, T., Vesterdal, L., Callesen, I., Caspersen, O.H., Scott-Bentsen, N., Rasmussen, E., Petersen, S.B., Olsen, T. M. and Hansen, M.G., 2020, Denmark's National Inventory Report 2020, Emission Inventories 1990-2018 - Submitted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol, Aarhus University, DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy, Scientific Report No. 372 http://dce2.au.dk/pub/SR372.pdf

Rust, N., Ridding, L., Ward, C., Clark, B., Kehoe, L., Dora, M., Whittingham, M., McGowan, P., Chaudhary, A., Reynolds, C., Trivedy, C. and West, N., 2020, How to transition to reduced-meat diets that benefit people and the planet, Science of The Total Environment, 718, pp. 137-208.

Rhodes, C., 2017, The Imperative for Regenerative Agriculture. Science Progress, 100, pp. 80-129.

Roorda, C., Frantzeskaki, N., Loorbach, D., Van Steenbergen, F., and Wittmayer, J., 2012, Transition Management in Urban Context, Guidance Manual-Collaborative Evaluation Version, Drift, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam.

Schot, J. Geels. F., 2008 Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy, Technology analysis and strategic management, 20(5), pp.537-554. 

The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2016, THE STATE OF DENMARK’S BIODIVERSITY FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE, Ministry of Environment and Food.