Farm diversity, classification schemes and multifunctionality.
Farm diversity, classification schemes and multifunctionality.
复制标题
农场多样性、分类方案和多功能性。
DOI：
10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.11.022
复制
发表时间：
2009
影响因子：
8.7
通讯作者：
Patrick Bonnafous
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. D. V. D. Ploeg;Catherine Laurent;F. Blondeau;Patrick Bonnafous
多样性不仅是农业固有的；它也可以被视为其主要资产之一，因为它提供了广泛的反应，可以帮助面对不确定的未来。不断变化的空间和时间框架与一系列多样化的农业战略之间的持续碰撞正在导致发展模式的持续流动的出现，这些模式可以在广泛的农业实践中实现，对比企业模式，农村家庭与农业所有制之间不断变化的关系，以及将农业和农业家庭与其所处的更广泛背景联系起来的差异化模式。农业中遇到的多方面多样性不仅是相关行动者的能动性和多价性的结果；它们的能动性和多价性反过来又受到物质和象征多样性的启发和加强，这有助于进一步展开多样性。几个世纪以来，对多样性的范围、规模、意义和原因的正确理解一直是一个主要问题——首先是现在被称为古典农学的问题，后来是农业科学的问题。然而，为这种理解而开发和使用的分类方案日益成为阿喀琉斯之踵，因为每一种分类方案都依赖于特定的假设，这些假设将带来整体农业多样性的特定特征，并将导致对农业是什么以及农业如何适应社会项目的不同观点。因此，它们是许多辩论和斗争的核心，不仅在农业科学领域，而且越来越多地在更广泛的社会层面上。人们越来越认识到农业的多功能性，特别是在欧盟政策不断变化的背景下，加强了这场辩论的相关性和重要性。在这种新的背景下，我们讨论的优势和限制不同的分类原则，通过比较两种方法已广泛使用在法国和荷兰。
Diversity is not only intrinsic to agriculture; it can be considered also as one of its main assets as it provides a wide range of responses that can help to face uncertain futures. The ongoing encounter between changing spatial and temporal frameworks and a set of diverse farming strategies is leading to the emergence of an ongoing flow of development models that could materialize in a wide range of farming practices, contrasting enterprise models, changing relations between rural households and agricultural holdings, and differentiated patterns that link farming and farming families to the wider context in which they are embedded. The many-sided diversity encountered in agriculture is not only the outcome of the agency and polyvalence of the actors involved; their agency and polyvalence are in turn inspired and strengthened by the material and symbolic diversity, which contributes to a further unfolding of diversity. A proper understanding of the range, dimensions, significance and causes of diversity has been, over the centuries, a main concern—first for what is now known as classical agronomy, and later on in agrarian sciences. Yet the classification schemes, developed and used for such an understanding, have increasingly become an Achilles heel as each of them relies on specific assumptions that will bring out particular features of the overall farm diversity and will result in different perspectives of what agriculture is and how it fits into societal projects. Consequently, they are at the core of many debates and struggles, not only within agrarian sciences but increasingly on a wider societal level. The growing recognition of multifunctionality in agriculture, especially in the context of the changing EU policy, strengthens the relevance and importance of this debate. In this new context, we discuss advantages and limits of different classification principles by comparing two methodologies which have been extensively used in France and the Netherlands.