1 Permaculture on the Conventional Farm an interdisciplinary case study Students: Milan Besselink: Earth Sciences (10469850) Guido Knibbe: Anthropology (10421521) Luut Dingemans: International and European Law (5977959) Tutor: Jaap Rothuizen MSc Date: 19-12-2014 Words: 6.660
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
Permaculture on the
Conventional Farm
an interdisciplinary case study
Students: Milan Besselink: Earth Sciences (10469850)
Guido Knibbe: Anthropology (10421521)
Luut Dingemans: International and European Law
(5977959)
Tutor: Jaap Rothuizen MSc
Date: 19-12-2014
Words: 6.660
2
ABSTRACT - This study explores some essential aspects that comprise an effective model
for sustainability applications in modern field crop agriculture. A case study on the Bloeiend
Bedrijf project in the Netherlands with over 550 participating farmers is analysed for its
success factors. This project is a promising model for the modern application of permaculture
principles. Systems thinking provides the basis for an interdisciplinary integration of
disciplinary analyses from the perspectives on Law Science, Earth Sciences and
Anthropology. Thus, this integration includes project structure, practical results of the
permaculture application and the experiences of the participants and regulators in the project,
including their interactions with the Dutch society. Results show that (1) collective subsidy
application, (2) the involvement of civil society and (3) a well-organized communication
structure are essential structural aspects of successful operation models for sustainability
projects. Essential practical aspects include (1) the use of farming applications that serve
multiple purposes in accord with permaculture principles, (2) that these applications show
measurable results to the farmer and society, (3) a particular symbolic and ritual value in these
applications and (4) social recognition. All of these aspects are recommended for
consideration by policy makers in both the public sector and the private sector.
Copyright IMAGES on title page:
By Wikibiro (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via
Wikimedia Commons
[[File:View along a field margin - geograph.org.uk - 1355339.jpg|View along a field margin -
Introduction Since the modernization of agriculture from the 1950's until the 1980's, efficiency and
yields per hectares have increased greatly in the Western world. The intensification was a
policy specifically intended to push agriculture from the primary sector to the industrial scale
(Grin, 2014). This was established with the help of uniform mono-culture crops, inorganic
fertilizer and intensification of pesticide usage. Apart from efficiency benefits, this
“productivist” paradigm (Lawrence, 2005) augmented environmental problems such as
decreasing biodiversity (Chapin et. al. 2000) and widespread usage of pesticides (Botkin, et
al. 2009).
In the beginning of the 21st century, society not only asks for productivity and
efficiency, but farmers are pressured to produce more sustainable as well. After decades of
scientific reports since Meadows et. Al. (1972) it is safe to say that many ecologists, climate
scientists and environmental scientists have stressed the importance of minimizing
environmental problems associated with modern agriculture such as biodiversity loss,
(over)usage of agricultural toxins and dealing with nutrient surplus and outflow to
(ground)water. These concerns lead to the incorporation of pillar-2 agro-environmental policy
into the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of Europe (Latacz-Lohmann and Hodge, 2003).
Moving step by step from a more traditional approach of income support for production to an
inclusion of subsidizing ecological services done by farmers under the heading of “rural
development”.
This research focusses on exploring effective operation models that promote
sustainability in modern agriculture. A case study on the “Bloeiend Bedrijf” project (referred
to as BB in this report) is conducted to determine the essential structural aspects that have led
to the successful operation of this project. First, the case study analyses how Functional
Agrobiodiversity (FAB)-edges may offer solutions to aforementioned ecological and
environmental problems. No structural study has yet been done on the practical application of
FAB-edges. Next, the systemic design of the BB case will be examined in accord with
General Systems Theory (GST, see Von Bertalanffy, 1956). Interestingly, FAB-edges are also
applied by experts in the modern field of permaculture, a design approach to sustainable
agriculture that is grounded on systems thinking. We hypothesize that an examination of a
permaculture application within a governmentally subsidizes operation model can provide a
fertile basis to structurally achieve sustainability gains in modern agriculture. More
information on permaculture and systems thinking will be provided in the first chapter.
The central question of this research is: “To what extend can the Bloeiend Bedrijf
project in the Netherlands serve as a model for long-term solutions toward more sustainable
field crop agriculture?” First, this report provides an introduction to systems thinking and
permaculture. Next is the case study of the BB project, which will also include a short note on
the methods of research that were used. Lastly, the system dynamics of the BB project are
analysed to determine essential aspects for success and how these can be applied more
broadly in agricultural operations.
5
Systems Thinking and Permaculture Systems thinking as a scientific method was pioneered around the 1950s by biologist
Ludwig Von Bertalanffy in his general systems theory (GST) (Von Bertalanffy, 1956). Von
Bertalanffy believed that a perception of the world in terms of interacting systems could be a
framework for the basic unity of human knowledge. The systems approach provides models
for comparison that could for the first time bridge the gap between the natural and social
sciences.
From the 1950’s onward, the systems approach has been further developed into a
practical method for interdisciplinary research. The famous systems theorist Ervin Laszlo
points out that this approach can be used to “build models of certain perspectival features of
phenomena and hold up the models for investigation and comparison” (Laszlo, 1971: p.175).
He explains that by modelling the interactions between the ‘features’ and ‘phenomena’ that
comprise a system, the scientist is able to map organized complexity.
The systems approach has two important implications for the research project that we
have conducted. First, it allows for the transcendence of monodisciplinarity through holistic
thinking, as described in Repko (2011: 274-278). This study thus recognizes that human
beings are interwoven into a hierarchy of isomorphic open systems that include ecosystems,
political systems and cultural systems. Human beings (in our case farmers, people who pass
by their lands, and the general Dutch society) thus represent the common ground between the
disciplines of earth science, law and anthropology in our interdisciplinary research. Second, as
a research method, the systems approach allows for the systemic analysis of the features and
phenomena relevant to each discipline and how they relate to others. This can help to identify
the mechanisms of feedback that are involved in and between the different systems that we
will describe. This approach creates common ground, both by organizing systemic
interactions and extending the scope of each discipline’s findings, as described in Repko
(2011: 340-347). Systems thinking thus allows for an overview perspective that is essential in
understanding how sustainability can be achieved in conventional farming.
One profound aspect of systems thinking is that it not only provides a theoretical tool
for the unity of science, but its philosophical and practical aspects are also available to anyone
who wants to apply them in the ‘real world’. Arguably the most straightforward and effective
form of such an application is found in the form of ‘Permaculture’, a design system that was
invented in the late 1970’s by Bill Mollison and David Holmgren (Mollison & Holmgren,
1978). Originally referring to gardening practices inspired by natural ecosystems,
permaculture practices have now stretched out through the whole realm of human habits.
These habits, ranging from economics to the use of technology and education, are all
approached as systems that together comprise human culture. Permaculture takes an
integrative systems approach to design human culture according to the model of nature. In the
words of Holmgren (2007, p.3): “Thus the permaculture vision of permanent or sustainable
agriculture has evolved to one of permanent or sustainable culture”. Mollison’s perspective on
total design in permaculture is visualized in figure 1 on the next page.
The FAB-edge is a natural design solution that the field of permaculture is already
familiar with. This study will take a systems approach to explore how the application of this
technique in the BB project connects to natural, social and political systems. The goal of this
6
approach is to provide an overview perspective that can serve to map the complexity of
successful sustainability projects. The resulting model can then be used by policy makers to
design for more sustainability in modern agriculture.
Figure 1: Total Design in permaculture. Source: Mollison, 1988, p.37
7
Part 1 – Case: Bloeiend Bedrijf
History and Organization “Bloeiend Bedrijf “, which can be translated as “Blossoming Venture”, is a project
based in The Netherlands from 2011 until 2014, in which a total of 550 farmers where
subsidized for applying specific ecological measures on their open field farm. The farmers
were professionally supported by various knowledge and agricultural institutions to do so.
Farmers implemented on their farms FAB-edges, known as “Akkerranden” in the project.
These are rows of flowers and herbs that attract biodiversity. The aim of the project was to
decrease pesticide usage of the farmers by attracting natural predators of insect pests,
increasing Functional Agro Biodiversity (FAB) and decreasing the amount of insecticides
used by the farmer (Bloeiend Bedrijf 2014).
In this report a thorough analysis of the project is made. In which we wish to answer
the research questions with the data, interviews and literature found concerning the BB
project. This will give an academic insight into how ecological measures work on the farm
and how governments and other stakeholders can be involved to contribute to a more
sustainable and more biologically diverse open field agriculture. Contributing to an
agricultural system where less pesticides are used and with a more biological diversity on
(and around) the farm. A complete analysis of the project is given in order to understand the
workings of a subsidized regulation with many different stakeholders involved, varying from
the European Common Agricultural Policy to regional farmer’s collectives, knowledge
institutes and the outlook of the individual farmers that play a role.
The “demoregeling beheer akkerranden” was a scheme by the Dutch Ministry of
economic affairs, agriculture and innovation (LE&I) from 2010 until 2014, and was
specifically aimed at subsidizing FAB- edges. It was co-funded by the Dutch ministry of
Agriculture, Economics and Innovation (LE&I) and European agriculture subsidies through
the Common Agricultural Policy.
A farmer named Teunis Jacob Slob was the main applicant of the subsidy and worked
at farmer organisation ‘Veelzijdig Boerenland’ while applying (2010). With the help of
another hundred farmers the BB project was able to start its first year. Two years would
follow and 550 farmers were ultimately involved. This research intends to look at the effects
and results BB managed to realise, as well as the way it was done. We thank the farmers and
institutions involved for their openness that enabled us an inside look into the workings of the
BB project.
8
Research Methods The case analysis is carried out through various research methods. First, a literature
study examines scientific papers, newsletters, and reports about the BB project and FAB-
edges. This data is appropriated to explore the role of FAB-edges in the natural environment,
the experiences of participants in the BB project, and the design of BB’s regulation structure.
Secondly, empirical data is collected in the form of interviews with BB’s project
regulators and one in-depth interview was held with a participating farmer. This empirical
information is used to complement and support the literature study.
Thirdly, inside knowledge into the project is obtained by participating in an evaluation
meeting that was hosted by the civil society groups involved in the BB project and which was
attended by participants. The information gathered at this meeting will not explicitly be
expressed in this report, but rather serves to complement the general knowledge that the
research team obtains from the internet and other sources with hands-on experience.
It was crucial that this research had an interdisciplinary approach, in order to fully
understand the project. The 4 criteria of interdisciplinary research that Repko (2012) explains
can all be seen in the report: (1) It was a complex case study, sustainable farming is (2) a
societal issue, (3) no single discipline could have addressed the case study, and (4) insights
from various disciplines are offered in the research.
9
Natural benefits and constraints of FAB-edges
The FAB-edges are
used in agricultural
practices and in BB. It is
defined as the whole of the
crop edge, any margin strip
present and the semi-natural
habitat associated with the
boundary (Greaves &
Marshall, 1987). The
boundary (figure 2) is the
barrier between fields or
two different types of land
use, usually in the form of
hedges and if present with a watercourse (Marshall & Moonen, 2002). The strip settled in the
field or at the edge of the field between boundary and the crop is defined as the margin strip.
This margin strip includes wildflower strips, grass strips, buffer strips, strips sown to bird
cover crops and buffer strips. The outer few metres of the crop is the crop edge (Marshall &
Moonen, 2002). The report of BB (2012) indicated that the herbal and flower mixtures they
used for the FAB-edges, stimulated useful biodiversity. For instance, the sown herbs and
flowers produce nectar and pollen which are also easy to reach for insects with short
mouthparts. Thereby, the sown herbs itself do not cause weed pressure and they don’t attract
pests and plagues. Another result is that the mixtures bloom as early and as long as possible,
therefore the multi-year mixtures forms habitat for beneficial insects to winter.
Predator insects and prey in the FAB-edge
Out of the latter it becomes clear that the FAB-edges have different functions, one of
these functions is that it serves as a hide out for different kinds of insects (Van Rijn, Willemse
& Alebeek, 2011). In this way the use of pesticides can be reduced or become unnecessary.
The results of the BB (2012) report indicated that the FAB-edges attracts two important
groups of natural predators. The species including lacewings, hoverflies and ichneumon flies,
are attracted to the nectar and pollen in flowers after which their larvae fight against the
harmful insects. And the species that are attracted to places for wintering and reproduction,
and from there hunt on other harmful insects. Examples include ground beetles, spiders and
ladybugs.
According to research of the BB (2013) report, the FAB-edges have especially a
positive effect on the Hoverfly populations. If there is sufficient bloom and there are sufficient
prey insects present in the crops, then in the late summer there are great quantities of
Hoverflies. Hoverflies can have up to 10 generations per year therefore populations can
increase tremendously. Also lacewings benefit from FAB-edges, but they only have two
generations per year. Therefore, the populations respond slower to increasing pest pressure.
The third important group of natural enemies are the ichneumon, for aphid control. This group
Figure 2, Source: Marshall & Moonen, 2002
10
appears to be independent on nectar and pollen because the honeydew that aphids secrete are
sufficient to build up an ichneumon population.
The FAB-edges of BB (2012) were primarily
developed for natural control of aphids in particular
cereals and consumption potato. BB observed in
their studies that most profits of FAB-edges could
be achieved in crops that meet the following criteria:
- They are prone to aphids;
- Aphids are a major reason to use
insecticides;
- For aphids there is not a "zero-tolerance": it
is tolerable that some aphids are present
before it exceeds the damage threshold
(figure 3).
Crops that meet these criteria are cereals, sugar beet and consumption or starch potato.
However, the function of FAB-edges on outbreaks are obviously wider, the outbreaks of
whitefly and snails can be reduced when well-developed populations of natural enemies are
present.
Impact of FAB-edges on insecticide usage
In the field meetings of BB (2013) it became
clear that natural enemies are not only present when the
FAB-edges flourish, but also before that. Landscapes
have naturally much to offer. The most important factor
that determines the presence of certain natural predators
is the presence of prey. If there were no aphids, then
there were no or very few natural enemies. At the
insecticide-treated plots beneficial insects were almost
absent (figure 4). According to the report of BB (2013)
this is caused by the insecticides, because it eliminates
the most important food source of natural predators.
The participants of BB indicated in the report that when
they do not use insecticides the chance of aphid
outbreaks may increase. But according to the results of
the BB (2013) report, the problem lies in the fact that
insect control occurs preventive. To overcome this they
recommend inspections on pest pressure. The excellent results of BB (2012) report of crop
protection in 2011 emphasizes the importance of crop inspections. Because at two-thirds of
the farmlands, aphids were observed and at just a third of them the threshold was exceeded.
Eventually the BB made clear that 67% of insecticide use by the participants is reduced and
Figure 4: The aphids pressure (upper) and the number of natural predators (bottom) in sprayed (left) and unsprayed (right) grain fields (numbers per 100 grain culms). Source: BB, 2012