Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
The epistemological limitation with regard to using causal knowledge from simple research
worlds is that some aspects are neglected because of the reduction. Some examples of neglected
aspects are crop rotation effects when doing research on single fields, the effects on farm eco-
nomics when doing research on cropping systems, the role of motivation (intention) in behav-
ioural studies, and the management factor when studying farm dynamics in experimental
farming systems or in the assessment of animal welfare.
Agriculture is, by definition, about management. Lockeretz (2000) describes organic
farming as interfering with nature just enough to get the job done, in comparison to conven-
tional agriculture which at times creates completely artificial environments. Regardless of the
system, the role of the human being is central to the success of that system. The human role is
most often highlighted in relation to animal health and welfare but is just as likely to apply to
crop and soil husbandry. Martini
et
al
. (2004) question the assertion that yield improvements
following conversion to organic production are related to improvements in soil quality and
suggest that they may relate to improved management skills and experience. Accounting for
the role of the manager thus becomes critical in comparative studies of systems. Trewavas
(2004) asserts that the only way to make a fair comparison between organic and conventional
farming is to use matched fields, on the same farm, managed by the same person. Although
this may overcome some of the difficulties in edaphic and climatic factors, it may negate the
comparison because it has been shown many times that organic and conventional farmers
have different attitudes to crop and animal husbandry (e.g. Lund and Algers 2002). There is
also evidence that as the organic farming sector grows in size, there are accompanying changes
in the type, and philosophy, of farmers going organic (Lund
et
al
. 2002).
In general, there are methodological and technical limits to doing more holistic research
because of the complexity and diversity of the research worlds. For example, it is difficult to
make a general predictive model of a complex research world. This is particularly true if this
world involves people, companies and organisations, which are self-ref lexive and therefore
adapt and change their perceptions of themselves in accordance with the knowledge they gain
from the model presented by the researchers. There are also ethical limits to research in
complex worlds, connected to the presence of humans, animals and ecosystems, which the
researchers have a moral responsibility to take into consideration and, in the case of people, to
involve them in these ethical considerations (see also Latour and Woolgar 1979). In this per-
spective, reduction entails (apart from methodological benefits) that the ethical questions are
externalised - they become part of the external communications of science and the actual
research can be done without ethical considerations. In a wider systemic perspective, however,
where science is seen as a part of society and nature, and with reference to the criterion of rele-
vance or (more generally) given the idea that science is morally responsible for its actions
(Jonas 1984, Alrøe and Kristensen 2003), there can be decisive ethical concerns connected
with the potential consequences of reductive research methods. The development and imple-
mentation of a comprehensive systemic research methodology that enables transdisciplinary
research must, therefore, also involve normative sciences that are concerned with ethics and
how to do good science.
Future perspecties on research approaches
The role of institutions and indiiduals in organic research
Across the world research on organic farming is carried out within a range of universities,
colleges, research institutes and private consultancies as well as by dedicated organic organisa-
tions. The nature of 'conventional' or 'mainstream' organisations versus dedicated organic
