IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i6p2083-d153313.html

How to Address the Sustainability Transition of Farming Systems? A Conceptual Framework to Organize Research

Author

Listed:
  • Guillaume Martin

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Sandrine Allain

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Jacques-Eric Bergez

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Delphine Burger-Leenhardt

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Julie Constantin

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Michel Duru

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Laurent Hazard

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Camille Lacombe

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Danièle Magda

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Marie-Angélina Magne

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, ENSFEA, INRA-INPT-ENSAT, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Julie Ryschawy

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Vincent Thénard

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Hélène Tribouillois

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

  • Magali Willaume

    (AGIR, Université de Toulouse, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, 31326 Castanet Tolosan, France)

Abstract

Stakeholders from academic, political, and social spheres encourage the development of more sustainable forms of agriculture. Given its scale and scope, the sustainability transition is a challenge to the entire agricultural sector. The main question is, how to support the transition process? In this article, we explore how agricultural science can address the sustainability transition of farming systems to understand and support transition processes. We discuss the potential for articulating three research approaches: comprehensive analysis, co-design, and simulation modeling. Comprehensive analysis of the sustainability transition provides perspectives on the interplay between resources, resource management, and related performances of farming systems on the one hand and technical, economic, and sociocultural dimensions of change on the other. Co-design of the sustainability transition stimulates local-scale transition experiments in the real world and identification of alternatives for change. Simulation modeling explores future-oriented scenarios of management at multiple levels and assesses their impacts. We illustrate the articulation of research approaches with two examples of research applied to agricultural water management and autonomy in crop-livestock systems. The resulting conceptual framework is the first one developed to organize research to understand and support the sustainability transition of farming systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Guillaume Martin & Sandrine Allain & Jacques-Eric Bergez & Delphine Burger-Leenhardt & Julie Constantin & Michel Duru & Laurent Hazard & Camille Lacombe & Danièle Magda & Marie-Angélina Magne & Julie , 2018. "How to Address the Sustainability Transition of Farming Systems? A Conceptual Framework to Organize Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:2083-:d:153313
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/2083/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/2083/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adam, M. & Corbeels, M. & Leffelaar, P.A. & Van Keulen, H. & Wery, J. & Ewert, F., 2012. "Building crop models within different crop modelling frameworks," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 57-63.
    2. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    3. repec:iwt:bosers:h041260 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ansell, Christopher K. & Bartenberger, Martin, 2016. "Varieties of experimentalism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 64-73.
    5. repec:iwt:bosers:h041261 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Gordon, Line J. & Finlayson, C. Max & Falkenmark, Malin, 2010. "Managing water in agriculture for food production and other ecosystem services," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(4), pages 512-519, April.
    7. Michel Etienne, 2014. "Elevages et territoires : concepts, méthodes, outils," Post-Print hal-01134585, HAL.
    8. Elsa T.A. Berthet & C�cile Barnaud & Nathalie Girard & Julie Labatut & Guillaume Martin, 2016. "How to foster agroecological innovations? A comparison of participatory design methods," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(2), pages 280-301, February.
    9. Duru, M. & Adam, M. & Cruz, P. & Martin, G. & Ansquer, P. & Ducourtieux, C. & Jouany, C. & Theau, J.P. & Viegas, J., 2009. "Modelling above-ground herbage mass for a wide range of grassland community types," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(2), pages 209-225.
    10. Asai, Masayasu & Moraine, Marc & Ryschawy, Julie & de Wit, Jan & Hoshide, Aaron K. & Martin, Guillaume, 2018. "Critical factors for crop-livestock integration beyond the farm level: A cross-analysis of worldwide case studies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 184-194.
    11. Gerry Stoker & Peter John, 2009. "Design Experiments: Engaging Policy Makers in the Search for Evidence about What Works," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(2), pages 356-373, June.
    12. Genus, Audley & Coles, Anne-Marie, 2008. "Rethinking the multi-level perspective of technological transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1436-1445, October.
    13. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    14. Kilelu, Catherine W. & Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2013. "Unravelling the role of innovation platforms in supporting co-evolution of innovation: Contributions and tensions in a smallholder dairy development programme," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 65-77.
    15. repec:iwt:bosers:h040193 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Pretty, Jules N., 1995. "Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(8), pages 1247-1263, August.
    17. Martin, G., 2015. "A conceptual framework to support adaptation of farming systems – Development and application with Forage Rummy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 52-61.
    18. Gerry Stoker & Peter John, 2009. "Design Experiments: Engaging Policy Makers in the Search for Evidence about What Works," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57, pages 356-373, June.
    19. Rasul, Golam & Thapa, Gopal B., 2004. "Sustainability of ecological and conventional agricultural systems in Bangladesh: an assessment based on environmental, economic and social perspectives," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 327-351, March.
    20. repec:iwt:bosers:h039769 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Barton, John & Davies, Lloyd & Dooley, Ben & Foxon, Timothy J. & Galloway, Stuart & Hammond, Geoffrey P. & O’Grady, Áine & Robertson, Elizabeth & Thomson, Murray, 2018. "Transition pathways for a UK low-carbon electricity system: Comparing scenarios and technology implications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2779-2790.
    22. Martin, G. & Duru, M. & Schellberg, J. & Ewert, F., 2012. "Simulations of plant productivity are affected by modelling approaches of farm management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 25-34.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bertrand Méda & Léonie Dusart & Juliette Protino & Philippe Lescoat & Cécile Berri & Pascale Magdelaine & Isabelle Bouvarel, 2021. "OVALI, Sustainability for Poultry ® : A Method Co-Designed by Stakeholders to Assess the Sustainability of Chicken Supply Chains in Their Territories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Jan Van der Lee & Laurens Klerkx & Bockline Omedo Bebe & Ashenafi Mengistu & Simon Oosting, 2018. "Intensification and Upgrading Dynamics in Emerging Dairy Clusters in the East African Highlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-24, November.
    3. Dernat, Sylvain & Grillot, Myriam & Andreotti, Federico & Martel, Gilles, 2025. "A sustainable game changer? Systematic review of serious games used for agriculture and research agenda," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    4. Fátima Matos Silva & Cristina Sousa & Helena Albuquerque, 2022. "Analytical Model for the Development Strategy of a Low-Density Territory: The Montesinho Natural Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-18, April.
    5. Jie Wang & Yuqiang Li & Junfeng Mai & Minmin Yuan & Zhiqiang Liu, 2025. "Highway Typical Scenario Operation and Maintenance Energy Demand Forecasting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-17, February.
    6. Sara Helen Kaweesa & Hamid El Bilali & Willibald Loiskandl, 2021. "Analysing the socio-technical transition to conservation agriculture in Uganda through the lens of the multi-level perspective," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 7606-7626, May.
    7. Alonso-Adame, Alba & Farahbakhsh, Siavash & Van Meensel, Jef & Marchand, Fleur & Van Passel, Steven, 2025. "Factors to scale out innovative organic farming systems: A case study in Flanders region, Belgium," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    8. Inga C. Melchior & Jens Newig, 2021. "Governing Transitions towards Sustainable Agriculture—Taking Stock of an Emerging Field of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, January.
    9. Chantal Gascuel & Michèle Tixier-Boichard & Benoit Dedieu & Cécile Détang-Dessendre & Pierre Dupraz & Philippe Faverdin & Laurent Hazard & Philippe Hinsinger & Isabelle Litrico-Chiarelli & Françoise M, 2019. "Réflexion prospective interdisciplinaire pour l’agroécologie. Rapport de synthèse," Post-Print hal-02154433, HAL.
    10. de Boon, Auvikki & Sandström, Camilla & Rose, David Christian, 2022. "Perceived legitimacy of agricultural transitions and implications for governance. Lessons learned from England’s post-Brexit agricultural transition," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    11. Živilė Gedminaitė-Raudonė & Rita Lankauskienė & Vitalija Simonaitytė, 2022. "Pathway to Green Transformation in Lithuania: Biogas Production from Manure and Waste," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, April.

    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. Dolinska, Aleksandra, 2017. "Bringing farmers into the game. Strengthening farmers' role in the innovation process through a simulation game, a case from Tunisia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 129-139.
    2. Laurent Hazard & Nathalie Couix & Camille Lacombe, 2022. "From evidence to value-based transition: the agroecological redesign of farming systems," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 405-416, March.
    3. Martin, G., 2015. "A conceptual framework to support adaptation of farming systems – Development and application with Forage Rummy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 52-61.
    4. Ringa Raudla & Külli Sarapuu & Johanna Vallistu & Kerli Onno & Nastassia Harbuzova, 2025. "The politics of experimental policymaking: the influence of blame avoidance and credit claiming," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 58(2), pages 245-266, June.
    5. Pigford, Ashlee-Ann E. & Hickey, Gordon M. & Klerkx, Laurens, 2018. "Beyond agricultural innovation systems? Exploring an agricultural innovation ecosystems approach for niche design and development in sustainability transitions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 116-121.
    6. Nina Savela & Jarkko Levänen & Sara Lindeman & Nnenesi Kgabi & Heikki Koivisto & Meri Olenius & Samuel John & Damas Mashauri & Minna M. Keinänen-Toivola, 2020. "Rapid Urbanization and Infrastructure Pressure: Comparing the Sustainability Transition Potential of Water and Energy Regimes in Namibia," World, MDPI, vol. 1(2), pages 1-18, July.
    7. Frans Sengers & Bruno Turnheim & Frans Berkhout, 2021. "Beyond experiments: Embedding outcomes in climate governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(6), pages 1148-1171, September.
    8. Rossing, Walter A.H. & Albicette, Maria Marta & Aguerre, Veronica & Leoni, Carolina & Ruggia, Andrea & Dogliotti, Santiago, 2021. "Crafting actionable knowledge on ecological intensification: Lessons from co-innovation approaches in Uruguay and Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    9. Martin, G. & Duru, M. & Schellberg, J. & Ewert, F., 2012. "Simulations of plant productivity are affected by modelling approaches of farm management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 25-34.
    10. Culot, Giovanna & Battistella, Cinzia, 2024. "Future ecosystem business model tool: Design science and field test in the efuel ecosystem towards the sustainability transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    11. F. Knobloch & J. -F. Mercure, 2016. "The behavioural aspect of green technology investments: a general positive model in the context of heterogeneous agents," Papers 1603.06888, arXiv.org.
    12. Ansell, Christopher K. & Bartenberger, Martin, 2016. "Varieties of experimentalism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 64-73.
    13. Claire A Dunlop, 2014. "The Possible Experts: How Epistemic Communities Negotiate Barriers to Knowledge Use in Ecosystems Services Policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(2), pages 208-228, April.
    14. Catia Milena Lopes & Annibal José Scavarda & Guilherme Luís Roehe Vaccaro & Christopher Rosa Pohlmann & André Luis Korzenowski, 2018. "Perspective of Business Models and Innovation for Sustainability Transition in Hospitals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, December.
    15. Daphne Ngar-yin Mah & Darren Man-wai Cheung, 2020. "Conceptualizing Niche–Regime Dynamics of Energy Transitions from a Political Economic Perspective: Insights from Community-Led Urban Solar in Seoul," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-28, June.
    16. Birtchnell, Thomas & Böhme, Tillmann & Gorkin, Robert, 2017. "3D printing and the third mission: The university in the materialization of intellectual capital," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 240-249.
    17. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    18. Patrick Mundler, 2020. "Nourrir, produire, protéger les personnes et les ressources - Les voies d’une transition agroécologique du système bioalimentaire québécois," CIRANO Project Reports 2020rp-32, CIRANO.
    19. Eva Sørensen & Jacob Torfing, 2021. "Accountable Government through Collaborative Governance?," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-20, November.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:10:y:2018:i:6:p:2083-:d:153313. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.