IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2020i1p15-d466296.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Swine Manure Management: A Tale of Two Agreements

Author

Listed:
  • Alison Deviney

    (Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA)

  • John Classen

    (Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA)

  • Jackie Bruce

    (Department of Agricultural and Human Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA)

  • Mahmoud Sharara

    (Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA)

Abstract

Intensification and concentration of swine farming has provided economic benefit to rural communities but also negative environmental and human health impacts, particularly from the use of the lagoon-sprayfield system for manure management. Although cost effective, this system is susceptible to poor management, unpleasant odor and other emissions, and inundation during extreme weather events. Competition for manure-spreading acres with other livestock or encroaching development can also pose a problem. This study examines two agreements between industry and government designed to develop and implement improved manure management technologies for swine farms: a voluntary agreement between the attorney general of North Carolina and Smithfield Foods and a consent judgment between the State of Missouri and Premium Standard Farms. Individuals involved in executing these agreements were interviewed to gain insight from their perspective on those processes and lessons they learned from their experience. Common themes among participant responses to support transition processes included the need to involve multiple stakeholder groups, clearly define goals, understand the system, allow time for incremental change, and provide adequate “protected space” for technology development and implementation. Viewing these themes through the lens of multi-level perspective theory identifies leverage points throughout the system to support transitioning farms to a more sustainable path of manure management.

Suggested Citation

  • Alison Deviney & John Classen & Jackie Bruce & Mahmoud Sharara, 2020. "Sustainable Swine Manure Management: A Tale of Two Agreements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:15-:d:466296
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/1/15/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/1/15/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    2. Mahmoud A. Sharara & Sammy S. Sadaka, 2018. "Opportunities and Barriers to Bioenergy Conversion Techniques and Their Potential Implementation on Swine Manure," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-26, April.
    3. Ross, Brent & Barry, Peter, 2005. "Contract Hog Production: A Case Study of Financial Arrangements," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2005, pages 1-6.
    4. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    5. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2014. "The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 772-791.
    6. Smith, Adrian & Stirling, Andy & Berkhout, Frans, 2005. "The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1491-1510, December.
    7. Tomislav Vukina, 2003. "The Relationship between Contracting and Livestock Waste Pollution," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(1), pages 66-88.
    8. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    9. Geels, Frank W. & Kemp, René, 2007. "Dynamics in socio-technical systems: Typology of change processes and contrasting case studies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 441-455.
    10. Smith, Adrian & Voß, Jan-Peter & Grin, John, 2010. "Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 435-448, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Sushandoyo, Dedy, 2015. "Transition pathways revisited: Established firms as multi-level actors in the heavy vehicle industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1017-1028.
    2. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    3. Kejia Yang & Johan Schot & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Shaping the Directionality of Sustainability Transitions: The Diverging Development Patterns of Solar PV in Two Chinese Provinces," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    4. Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    5. Nilsson, Måns & Nykvist, Björn, 2016. "Governing the electric vehicle transition – Near term interventions to support a green energy economy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1360-1371.
    6. Manning, Stephan & Reinecke, Juliane, 2016. "A modular governance architecture in-the-making: How transnational standard-setters govern sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 618-633.
    7. Kvellheim, Ann Kristin, 2017. "The power of buildings in climate change mitigation: The case of Norway," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 653-661.
    8. Ignė Stalmokaitė & Johanna Yliskylä-Peuralahti, 2019. "Sustainability Transitions in Baltic Sea Shipping: Exploring the Responses of Firms to Regulatory Changes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-23, March.
    9. Sangeetha Chandrashekeran, 2016. "Multidimensionality and the multilevel perspective: Territory, scale, and networks in a failed demand-side energy transition in Australia," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 48(8), pages 1636-1656, August.
    10. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The interplay of institutions, actors and technologies in socio-technical systems — An analysis of transformations in the Australian urban water sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 298-312.
    11. Jain, Sanjay, 2020. "Fumbling to the future? Socio-technical regime change in the recorded music industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    12. McMeekin, Andrew & Geels, Frank W. & Hodson, Mike, 2019. "Mapping the winds of whole system reconfiguration: Analysing low-carbon transformations across production, distribution and consumption in the UK electricity system (1990–2016)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1216-1231.
    13. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical network analysis – a methodological framework and a case study from the water sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2035, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    14. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Binz, Christian, 2018. "Global socio-technical regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 735-749.
    15. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    16. Heiberg, Jonas & Truffer, Bernhard & Binz, Christian, 2022. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    17. Hamid El Bilali, 2019. "The Multi-Level Perspective in Research on Sustainability Transitions in Agriculture and Food Systems: A Systematic Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-24, April.
    18. Harriet Bulkeley & Vanesa Castán Broto & Anne Maassen, 2014. "Low-carbon Transitions and the Reconfiguration of Urban Infrastructure," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(7), pages 1471-1486, May.
    19. Rosenbloom, Daniel & Berton, Harris & Meadowcroft, James, 2016. "Framing the sun: A discursive approach to understanding multi-dimensional interactions within socio-technical transitions through the case of solar electricity in Ontario, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1275-1290.
    20. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:15-:d:466296. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.