Introduction - Transition Pathways towards Sustainability in Agriculture: Case Studies from Europe - page 6

processes towards a more sustainable model of agriculture in Europe. The main purpose of
this concept is to directly explore the problem of ageing farming populations, considered
from a policy perspective as a key threat to the future sustainability of agriculture in Europe
(DGIP, 2012). A brief review of the statistics suggests that there is a 'young farmer
problem' in Europe: almost one third of farms have a land-holder who is above 65 years of
age (Eurostat, 2011), while young farmers (< 35 years) can be found only on 7.5% of farms
in Europe. Yet a closer look at the 'young farmer problem' opens additional questions that
challenge some of its core arguments. First, there are considerable differences between
countries, and age structures often correspond with farm-size structures. Second, there is
insufficient empirical evidence to explain at what level the shortage of young people in
agriculture becomes a problem, and what the negative consequences of outmigration may
be. Regarding social sustainability, the most worrying situation is in countries that have a
shortage of young farmers and, at the same time, have a relatively high proportion of older
farmers (Zagata and Lošťák, 2014). Yet negative consequences are not related to the
societal aspects of agriculture alone, but interact with others, especially economic and
environmental processes. The available evidence shows that enterprises with young farmers
tend to generate higher income and are more productive (Eurostat, 2011). Some of the case
studies presented in this topic have therefore looked for evidence of why different farming
models appeal to young people and new entrants to farming, and what obstacles they face
in taking up farming as a career and/or lifestyle choice.
The environmental sustainability of European agricultural areas has faced similar
challenges. The post-war era has been characterized by a transition from productivism to
non-productivism, with increasing emphasis on environmental conservation of the
countryside particularly evident from the mid-1980s onwards (Wilson, 2001, 2007;
Marsden, 2013). While the era of productivism was seen generally as a time of
maximization of agricultural productivity and income, with little regard for the
environment, the non-productivist era has been characterized by an emphasis on
multifunctional use of the countryside which includes both agricultural production and
environmental conservation (Wilson, 2007; Robinson, 2008). However, as various
commentators have emphasized (e.g. Marsden et al ., 1993; Wilson, 2001), this transition
has been spatially and temporally uneven, with some lowland and fertile European
agricultural areas becoming ever more productivist (so-called 'super-productivism'), while
upland and marginal agricultural areas have increasingly taken non-productivist pathways
characterized by low-intensity and (usually) environmentally-friendly farming (Wilson,
2010). It is the latter areas that have particularly benefited from agri-environmental
subsidies, although there continues to be considerable debate as to whether agri-
environmental payments have led to a genuine improvement in the environment or just
acted as 'green subsidies' to keep economically marginal farm households 'on the land'
(Potter and Tilzey, 2005; Dibden and Cocklin, 2009).
Most worryingly from an environmental sustainability perspective have been
developments over the last 10 to 15 years which suggest that the transition towards a more
environmentally sustainable countryside has been only partial at best. Whilst the 1990s
could be regarded as the 'greenest' decade in European agriculture with regard to policy
support (e.g. up to 20% of EU farmland under set-aside and >25% of agricultural land
under agri-environmental payments, Buller et al ., 2000), the 2010s saw an overall reduction
in support for low intensity agriculture despite much policy rhetoric related to the CAP 2 nd